The Right To Keep and Bear Arms

...

Damn military jargon.

You should get Sentry Guns with Autocannons!

There Is No Kill Like Overkill

I'll look into getting a Phalanx or two for the yard, and mounting a Mk-19 on the roof.

^ Right after I get a 57mm S-60 installed in my backyard.

Park a Katyusha launcher in your back yard and you won't have to worry about those kids blasting music down the road.

fuck that shit I'm getting a huey and a few private contractors to man the minigun

I'm getting an SA-2 Guideline. Goddamn MiGs on my lawn◊.

Bitches don't know about my Mi G 21!

A national forest is actually the place around here where most people shoot. I live in the city, so we have an indoor handgun/.22 range in town, and the nearest place is the Los Padres National Forest. In National Forests you are legally allowed to be armed and to use areas there for target practice so long as you are safe about it. Trust me, National Forests are so damn big that noise isn't really a problem.

As to using mace/OC spray as a home-defense tool, your example of the drunk guy is probably the worst possible example. Pepper spray has a rather negligible effect on people who are under the influence of alcohol because their mucous membranes and pores are clogged up with excessive sweat, as are the eyes. It will have a minimal effect, and then that minimal effect will dissipate very fast. I've OC sprayed lots of drunk military personnel, needless to say I no longer even worry about spray, I go straight to the baton if it's about to get hairy.

Ok saw some stuff to comment on.

Criminals with body armor in the home invader variety are rare. Where you will start seeing them with it more consistantly is high risk robbery situations like banks, heavily guarded jewelery stores, and other high security targets. They don't always wear body armor but it has become a bit more common. Some gangs are starting to show up with their trigger pullers wearing some body armor but still not all that common.

All the most famous incidents of criminals with body armor are the uncommon occurences rather then occuring constantly.

Bullets will tumble usually after striking something and richochet off even and ak round. Ak rounds are devastating because of the bullet mass and round behaviour post impact. The round delivers a high amount of hydrostatic shock and it usually tumbles after it enters the body.

Hitting a target in the head is very difficult especially on a moving target. The military and police are trained aim center mass. Your odds of hitting and scoring a killing or debilitatin hit are exponentially greater. Snipers, designated marksmen, and specialy trained and equiped people are the ones who usually aim for head shots.

There is a an exception to that rule but it is for close quarters fighting. Called the Mozambique or Failure Drill. You shoot the enemy twice in the chest and then take a carefully aimed shot center of the head. This was used to defeat targets who would not go down easily or were wearing body armor.

While outside of dinking around (shooting holes in things normal bullets have trouble with) or participating in themed compeitition shooting, there is no other reason for a civilian to own Ap ammo.

Your common handguns will peter out in hitting power around 80-90 yds. There are some ammo types that will have better range but are usually fired from high power handguns. Also ideal hand gun engagement range is 10-30 yds usually. It is possible to hit center mass even with a berretta at 90 yds just don't expect your bullet to hit all that hard. The rounds lose a lot of energy as they fly.

As barkey noted various forms of intoxication can render OC or even tasers ineffective. Someimtes you have to club them or in the more extreme cases shoot them.

Really if you want to defend your home get a pump action shotgun and load it up with 00 buck shot. The sound of a pump shot gun chambering a round is nearly universally recognized around the world and has proven to scare off intruders the vast majority of the time.

Some intruders may attack you if your not armed or threatening but will give up or run if confronted by a armed home owner.(butcher knives, baseball bats, swords for those who own them, machetes etc work pretty well for intimidation) They are not quite usually stupid and know it is better to give up or go away rather then risk being shot or injured by angry home owner who feels threatened.

If your going to arm yourself for protection you need to look at the facts. Is where you are living actually dangerous enough that you need to arm yourself. How likely are you to bump into trouble in your daily routine or at home vs being in places that you normally don't go that increase your danger. Are you able to get basic training and willing to do some basic research on your own to pick the right classes, weapons, and ammo. Do you have to have permits where are your weapons and not permitted etc. If you use your firearm in any location you frequent and might find trouble will you endanger others in doing so.

Shoot to kill is better then shoot to wound. Wounded adversaries can still possibly fight. If your not ready to do that don't buy the gun and find other means to defend yourself.

^

It's also recognized in the military and law enforcement that there is no such thing as shooting to wound. It's a civilian propagated myth, because even if I shoot some jackass in the leg I could rip his femoral artery and he could bleed out in a minute.(And by civilian propagated I mean people who don't have to be knowledgeable about the realities of what being shot is all about think that it's even vaguely possible, they also don't account for adrenaline or stress)

I hate that people even believe shooting to wound is a concept. If you are shooting someone, you are trying to kill them, end of story. You shoot them until they are no longer a threat in the best possible manner available, meaning you keep shooting them in the chest until they go down and aren't capable of harming you. If they live, good for them, but never expect that.

edited 17th Jul '11 3:56:21 PM by Barkey

Owning a gun as has been noted is a big responsibility even if it is just for hobby shooting. Like barkey noted it is shockingly easy to unintentionally kill someone with what you thought to be a wounding shot.

Again we need reasonable gun control with a emphasis on owner responsibility, gun safety, safe storage, and safe use. A licensing scheme similar to what we use with vehicles would work just fine.

edited 17th Jul '11 4:42:00 PM by TuefelHundenIV

That... why have I never thought of it like that? That's genius!

We have a scheme like that for our concealed carry card holders here in Omaha. You have a exam in writing followed by a practical test and firearms safety test. They also do your background check before licensing you for your CC permit. I dare say our CC holders are probably some of the most carefully sorted and tested gun owners in our city.

I believe that people should be free to own guns, but only if they pass a class and get licensed to have them first. The qualifications should be as strict, if not stricter, than the qualifications for driving.

Also, in Seattle, you can't carry a concealed weapon that's more than six feet in length.

edited 17th Jul '11 5:15:12 PM by LilPaladinSuzy

...Kind of hard to conceal a six foot long weapon much less carry one.

^

See, the problem we have here is that we can issue them, but the only way you will actually get one is if you're rich, a politician, a celebrity, or someone who has a job involving carrying high value things like money or jewelery.

Or, failing those, be good buddies with your county sheriff. So in other words, if you're a law abiding and well trained citizen, it doesn't matter how good of an idea it might be to let you carry, you aren't going to. It's a corrupt ass system how we do permits in California. Then there's backwoods redneck counties like Kern that will issue them to all the good ol boys who grew up there.

My state, Minnesota, is a bit more sensible in it's gun laws.

If you're 18 or older, not a felon, haven't commited a violent crime, don't have a restraining order involving spousal/girlfriend/family abuse, and no conviction concerning illegal drugs with the exception of minor marijuana offenses, congrats, you can buy a rifle or shotgun that's in a "sporting" configuration.

You want to hunt with your firearm? Take a firearm safety course. After you pass, you can buy hunting licenses.

You want a handgun or a rifle/shotgun with a pistol grip or other "non-sporting" configurations, you have to be 21 or older and go to the local sheriff's office and fill out some forms for a permit to purchase handguns, at no charge. If you come up clean on the background check, they must issue you the permit within a week. You can now buy handguns without a waiting period. The permit is good for 1 year.

Want to conceal carry or open carry? Gotta be 21 again, take a class in conceal/open carry from any registered trainer, then file the paperwork at the sheriff's office again, this time with a charge (IIRC it's between $70-100). Again with the background check, and one week later, you'll have your CCW permit and you can conceal or open carry. The CCW permit is good for 3 or 4 years and also allows you to buy handguns without a waiting period.

Want to own an NFA weapon (machine guns, short barreled rifles/shotguns, explosive devices) that doesn't include a silencer? Just make sure you follow the federal laws which concern them: The National Firearms Act of 1934, The Gun Control Act of 1968, and The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

Silencers are outright banned in Minnesota.

Other than the whole "sporting configuration" crap, silencers, and the age variation between 18 and 21, I think Minnesota's gun laws are sensible. As for the federal laws, I think the NFA is about where I like the regulation to be. I personally don't like the latter two laws because they outright ban certain guns simply because they are imported or manufactured after a certain date, among a few other reasons.

edited 18th Jul '11 1:14:06 AM by Driscoll

Yeah, I agree. NFA is good to go.

I don't debate that if you shoot you shoot to kill, but I thought shooting the pelvis was one of the areas more likely to not cause fatal damage?

Not that you'd have the luxury of aiming there in a heated exchange.

No, you aim for the pelvis because odds are it will put them down physically and make them not a threat very quickly. Short of shooting someone in the head, it's one of the quickest ways to neutralize a threat.

However, the pelvis is a big bone. When you hit a big bone with a round, you the round usually won't exit. Instead it'll both fragment the bone and the bullet, and then it'll skip around like they are in a blender, being close to way too many important veins, and directly below several organs. Not to mention that you might just blow his dick off instead, thankfully that has a tendency to ensure death, what with the way adrenaline gives you a boner and the ensuing blood loss...

But yeah, that's the big pet peeve of mine. Unless you're a sniper or you get the drop on someone, you should never be aiming for some magical "non lethal shot". If you're about to shoot someone and you can shoot them in the head, do it. If you aren't confident in your ability to hit the head in that space of time, then you should just be emptying the magazine into the center of mass. Even if they have body armor they will be down for the count at that sort of range. Being hit by a bullet while wearing body armor still feels like a flying brick/brick sized freight train just smashed into you.

edited 18th Jul '11 1:59:29 AM by Barkey

Whoops, forgot to add, being involuntarily committed to a mental facility also makes you lose your gun rights. Also, judges can reinstate gun rights for any person who's lost them if they can prove they have become responsible enough to have those rights back.

Yikes. I thought there had to be something up with that one.

I'm not sure I agree with this sentiment. I don't believe that there's a magical coating they give bullets that makes them armor piercing, so the only way to even define this is with technical terms.