Sign in to follow this  
bytor2112

Gun opinions

Recommended Posts

I have a Sig Sauer P227. Love the .45 ACP. I also have my CCW, but alas, no carry in the Middle East, but that will be changing in a couple of months. I haven't carried yet though. I've never needed to (yet) and now I worry that I actually might find myself in the wrong situation. I won't let my wife know when I do though,... she will, no doubt, give that 'give away' look and then I'm toast.

 

Once home I will spend that nest egg from my allowance I've been saving to purchase a Ruger Mini-30 using the AK round and a Ruger 10/22 if funds hold out.

 

I'm trying to get my wife to spring for that Mossberg 500 I've been wanting as well,... when I got the Sig she seemed to think I didn't need the shotgun anymore. What?...

 

I do plan on making a few stair handrail and rebar spears, a pvc 80lb bow, a pvc 100lb crossbow and an atlatl. Other items may include rebar bungy sticks and if I can just figure out how to get my pressure washer to spray gas.... :P

 

Do call ahead before you come over after WROL comes nocking.

Edited by Magen_Avot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amuses me, this American fashion for guns. To about the same extent it distresses me. The reason you all need guns is because you all have guns. If some movement - say a religious one, perhaps even a whole church - chose to disarm, and started a disarmament movement, then eventually you might end up in a much better place. A place where no-one needs guns, because no one has guns. Who knows, you might even arrive at a place where innocent school kids are safe from massacres. If guns were limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind. But then again, to get to that place, you would need to trust your government.

 

Best wishes, 2RM

Edited by 2ndRateMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amuses me, this American fashion for guns. To about the same extent it distresses me. The reason you all need guns is because you all have guns. If some movement - say a religious one, perhaps even a whole church - chose to disarm, and started a disarmament movement, then eventually you might end up in a much better place. A place where no-one needs guns, because no one has guns. Who knows, you might even arrive at a place where innocent school kids are safe from massacres. If guns where limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind. But then again, to get to that place, you would need to trust your government.

This is really laughable, and quite predictable. Yet another lecture from yet another pious, know-it-all European. Brits seem especially vulnerable to this sort of mindless holier-than-thou-ism. There's a reason we left merrie olde England.

 

Yes, it's all about saving children and trusting government. Just keep telling yourself that. Honestly, there's no conversing with such people and their hermetically sealed minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amuses me, this American fashion for guns. To about the same extent it distresses me. The reason you all need guns is because you all have guns. If some movement - say a religious one, perhaps even a whole church - chose to disarm, and started a disarmament movement, then eventually you might end up in a much better place. A place where no-one needs guns, because no one has guns. Who knows, you might even arrive at a place where innocent school kids are safe from massacres. If guns where limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind. But then again, to get to that place, you would need to trust your government.

 

Best wishes, 2RM

 

I grew up with guns.  We either raised our own meat or we hunted it.  Either way we killed, butchered and dressed our own meet.  There are good reasons to own a gun.  We also must understand that guns are very much a part of the world we live in and anyone with a gun has a distinct and decided advantage over someone or someones without a gun.

 

But I think the above post has some points to it and that has to do with the use of guns (or for that matter any weapon) that us used for strictly defense purposes.  If we have such weapon or weapons then either we have already decided to kill a human being and are just waiting for the opportunity or we are very likely to get our self and/or someone we care about killed.

 

The last thought I have is in essence a question about those individuals that refuse to have anything to do with guns as though guns themselves are immoral - thinking that someone will or ought to stand between them and any "bad" guys with guns.  This to me it the very height of hypocrisy and stupidity.  I believe that the use of firearms needs to be a mandatory part of education - public or private.  And than no one should think of themselves as educated that does not know how to use and maintain a gun.  I also believe that mandatory service in the military should be necessary before any free citizen in any country should be given the right to vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If guns where limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind.

 

My peace of mind comes from knowing that if someone comes into my home to harm my family, I can defend them rather than wait for the police to arrive too late.

 

"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away."

Edited by unixknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amuses me, this American fashion for guns. To about the same extent it distresses me. The reason you all need guns is because you all have guns. If some movement - say a religious one, perhaps even a whole church - chose to disarm, and started a disarmament movement, then eventually you might end up in a much better place. A place where no-one needs guns, because no one has guns. Who knows, you might even arrive at a place where innocent school kids are safe from massacres. If guns were limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind. But then again, to get to that place, you would need to trust your government.

 

Best wishes, 2RM

 

Yes indeed....in the millenium for sure. But here on this fallen sphere...not a chance. Plenty of other ways to kill or massacre school children. I shoot for sport and carry for protection and I can only assume you would agree that trusting any government is foolishness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amuses me, this American fashion for guns. To about the same extent it distresses me. The reason you all need guns is because you all have guns. If some movement - say a religious one, perhaps even a whole church - chose to disarm, and started a disarmament movement, then eventually you might end up in a much better place. A place where no-one needs guns, because no one has guns. Who knows, you might even arrive at a place where innocent school kids are safe from massacres. If guns were limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind. But then again, to get to that place, you would need to trust your government.

 

Best wishes, 2RM

We just bought our first gun earlier in 2014. I guess I don't get your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amuses me, this American fashion for guns. To about the same extent it distresses me. The reason you all need guns is because you all have guns. If some movement - say a religious one, perhaps even a whole church - chose to disarm, and started a disarmament movement, then eventually you might end up in a much better place. A place where no-one needs guns, because no one has guns. Who knows, you might even arrive at a place where innocent school kids are safe from massacres. If guns were limited to legitimate law enforcers, and civilians carrying weapons were illegal, you might all gain some peace of mind. But then again, to get to that place, you would need to trust your government.

 

Best wishes, 2RM

What country do you live in that trusts their government ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biggest reasons I went with the Glock 17 instead of the Sig or the H&K:

 

1. Cost. Between $100.00-$200.00 less expensive. 

2. History of exceptional reliability

3. Availability of accessories. G17 has been around since 1982....

4. Inexpensive magazines. Magazines for my Sig are around $50.00, G17 mags are half that....

5. Very lightweight for a double stack pistol.

6. Felt like a perfect fit in my hand.

7. Simple to take down and clean....really awesome design.

 

I thought Glocks were ugly....but they have really grown on me. I will be shooting tomorrow.....

Edited by bytor2112

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What country do you live in that trusts their government ??

 

I'm from the UK. We may moan about our politicians and rate them somewhere below intestinal worms and leeches but above real estate agents in the scale of parasite offensiveness, but, on the whole, we recognise they are generally in the job to make our country a better place. And we know, as in any democracy, we get the government we deserve. So, we adopt the cold war disarmament policy towards them - trust, but verify.

 

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited by 2ndRateMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately I just can't afford a gun. I would like to build a collection including a semi-auto .22 long gun (anything really, just to plink targets), a semi-auto shotgun with changeable barrels, a short tactical barrel and a long hunting barrel, a .40 pistol for concealed carry (I've had my eyes set on a sig p229 but they are just so expensive), and last but not least, a rifle that shoots .223 - 5.56 NATO... maybe a mini 14.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew up with guns.  We either raised our own meat or we hunted it.  Either way we killed, butchered and dressed our own meet.  There are good reasons to own a gun.  We also must understand that guns are very much a part of the world we live in and anyone with a gun has a distinct and decided advantage over someone or someones without a gun.

 

But I think the above post has some points to it and that has to do with the use of guns (or for that matter any weapon) that us used for strictly defense purposes.  If we have such weapon or weapons then either we have already decided to kill a human being and are just waiting for the opportunity or we are very likely to get our self and/or someone we care about killed.

 

The last thought I have is in essence a question about those individuals that refuse to have anything to do with guns as though guns themselves are immoral - thinking that someone will or ought to stand between them and any "bad" guys with guns.  This to me it the very height of hypocrisy and stupidity.  I believe that the use of firearms needs to be a mandatory part of education - public or private.  And than no one should think of themselves as educated that does not know how to use and maintain a gun.  I also believe that mandatory service in the military should be necessary before any free citizen in any country should be given the right to vote.

 

Well, there is much I agree with, here. I too, was brought up around guns. At age 12, I was shooting for my school at Bisley. By age 18, I was at Sandhurst, training to be an army officer.

 

But I have renounced firearms. In respect of meat, there are often more humane ways to dispatch an animal. In respect of war; well, I now rely on the army in which I once served. In respect of self-defence, I think our police do a better job than we could expect from an armed populace, with all the risks of weaponry in wrong hands that entails.

 

As for the morality of weaponry. This is often trotted out as a defence by pro-gun lobby, as if a semi-automatic assault rifle were just a tool, like a hammer. The truth is, tools are made for a purpose. The purpose of a hammer is neutral, maybe even morally positive; to drive in nails and construct things. The purpose of an assault rifle is wholly destructive, wholly negative, being designed to kill, and only kill. The fewer assault rifles inhabiting the world, the fewer deaths there would be.

 

But someone has to take a stand, find the guts to say 'I would rather die than kill', live by that creed, and provide that example.

 

Then, we might start to see a reduction in entirely gratuitous deaths by small arms fire in the civilian sphere; a result for all concerned.

 

Best wishes, 2RM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, history is replete with unarmed societies. Someone always showed up to let 'em know how much appreciated it was that no one could stand in the way of an otherwise successful and 'peaceful' exchange of cultures. At least for the invaders.

 

I guess if we were more righteous in our desires we would make oaths like the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's and prostrate ourselves to be slaughtered by the misled invaders (should that occur). Maybe a few might come to Christ. Or perhaps someone who is looking out for us will protect us... can the government really fulfill that role? I have difficulty with that one.

 

There may be some who can't wait for WROL, but I for one do not relish any situation where life may be taken. I don't even hunt (or lol, own a pressure washer), but I may need to someday. Maybe. I hope for community strength, but I don't believe an unarmed community would stand a chance in some circumstances,... I ponder the crime figures where the citizens are armed against where they arn't.

 

But... more power to anyone who wishes to live so. I hope the modern Anti-Nephi-Lehi's remember how to cultivate gardens for a program they might call "food for protection".

 

In the meantime we can enjoy sporting events and barbeque's without mayhem and death... (soccer aside) but now a nagging question... can I come unto Christ and still own a gun? Now there's a debate! Could I live long enough, through the coming days to come unto Christ without a gun?

 

Oh,... and congrats on the purchase Bytor... even if it is a glock. :D

Edited by Magen_Avot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh,... and congrats on the purchase Bytor... even if it is a glock.  :D

 

 

Haha....yeah, I was not a Glock fanboy....but, I wanted a striker fired 9mm and I was a bit surprised myself when I purchased the G17, cuz I went in for the Sig P320.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it when anti-gun folks trot out the phrase "assault rifle" as a way to boost the emotional impact of their statements.  Anyone who has an understanding of firearms knows how utterly arbitrary that phrase is.  This is why those arguments gain no traction with gun enthusiasts... we just know better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But someone has to take a stand, find the guts to say 'I would rather die than kill', live by that creed, and provide that example.

 

We actually have a pretty clearcut example out of the Book of Mormon, in Alma 24.

 

...they took their swords, and all the weapons which were used for the shedding of man’s blood, and they did bury them up deep in the earth. ...rather than shed the blood of their brethren they would give up their own lives;

 

And we also find out how that worked out for them.  Three short verses later. 

 

...the Lamanites began to fall upon them, and began to slay them with the sword. And thus without meeting any resistance, they did slay a thousand and five of them.  

 

Overlooked thing #1: These folks used to be the bad guys.  They had turned from a life of killing and bloodshed.  They were murderers, and in this way they repented.  

 

Anyway, we're told everything worked out for the best (except for the thousand and five killed, and their friends and families).  Because:

 

"And it came to pass that the people of God were joined that day by more than the number who had been slain; and those who had been slain were righteous people, therefore we have no reason to doubt but what they were saved."

 

Sounds a lot like "Oh, I'll just give up my means of self-defense, and if I die it'll be ok because I'll be in heaven".  I have kids and a wife.  I gotta say I don't see the appeal, although I understand why it appeals to others.  

 

Anyway we fast forward to chapter 53, and these folks have become a burden on the other, non-oath-of-peace-taking Nephites:

 

"And now behold, I have somewhat to say concerning the people of Ammon, who, in the beginning, were Lamanites; but by Ammon and his brethren, or rather by the power and word of God, they had been converted unto the Lord; and they had been brought down into the land of Zarahemla, and had ever since been protected by the Nephites."

 

Overlooked thing #2:  The pacifists still needed protection from the armed Nephites, against enemies who were willing to kill.  Peace didn't break out, 2ndratemind's utopia was never realized.  

 

The people of Ammon saw what was happening: 

 

"But it came to pass that when they saw the danger, and the many afflictions and tribulations which the Nephites bore for them, they were moved with compassion and were desirous to take up arms in the defence of their country."

 

Overlooked thing #3: They were on the verge of giving up their pacifism, renouncing their oath, and getting ready to fight and kill again.  It was offensive to them that their lives of peace were bought with the sacrifice and blood of other folks.  

 

Overlooked thing #4:  Not only did the Nephites fight, kill, and die to protect them, but their own children ended up becoming warriors to fight and kill in order to protect them.

 

"... they had many sons, who had not entered into [the oath of peace]; therefore they did assemble themselves together at this time, as many as were able to take up arms, and they called themselves Nephites.  And they entered into a covenant to fight for the liberty of the Nephites, yea, to protect the land unto the laying down of their lives; yea, even they covenanted that they never would give up their liberty, but they would fight in all cases to protect the Nephites and themselves from bondage."

 

In 2ndratemind's mind, all we need to make America a better place, is for someone to start a wave of social change by taking a stand.  Then peace breaks out and nobody needs guns any more, and hooray everyone.  In reality, that's possible, as long as there are still plenty of good guys out there with guns to protect them in their safe little pacifist bubble.

 

... And they aren't targeted by Islamic extremists and beheaded, like we saw in Oklahoma.

 

... And they aren't caught in the crossfire of a gang war, or they don't become a random targeted killing by someone trying to gain respect in their gang.

 

... And they don't become a home invasion victim, or surprise a burglar who decides they'd rather kill than go back to prison.

 

... And they don't have a violent ex- who isn't impressed by a restraining order.

 

... And they don't have their kids in a school where someone decides to go out with a bang and take as many innocents as they can.  

Edited by NeuroTypical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But someone has to take a stand, find the guts to say 'I would rather die than kill', live by that creed, and provide that example.

Good luck, my friend. We will be sure to put flowers on your grave and mourn your blind naivete when we bring our children to show them the results of putting one's head in the sand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm from the UK. We may moan about our politicians and rate them somewhere below intestinal worms and leeches but above real estate agents in the scale of parasite offensiveness, but, on the whole, we recognise they are generally in the job to make our country a better place. And we know, as in any democracy, we get the government we deserve. So, we adopt the cold war disarmament policy towards them - trust, but verify.

 

Best wishes, 2RM.

When I was there they couldn't stand Maggie....sounded just like citizens here in this country complaining about political leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shot the new Glock 17 today. I must say I really enjoyed it and am more accurate with it than my Sig Saur. Both are excellent firearms, the SIg has a high bore axis versus the Glock which has a low bore axis and is lighter. Not used to the "drop in the bucket" sights on the Glock but they seem to work.

 

Glock perfection? Maybe.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this