One lawyers opinion.

Discussion in 'Hunters Rights Forum' started by The Other David, May 23, 2003.

  1. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    15,506
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    One that I agree with!
    David

    No rational family should be without the best gun to defend its home

    By Byran Aleksich
    May 20, 2003 11:15 p.m.

    In September 1994, Congress made it "unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon." - 18 USC Section 922 (v) 91.

    The statute also limited magazine capacities to 10 rounds. Thereafter, market forces eviscerated the law, as weapon manufacturers modified gun design to thwart the statute's intent. And 30-round clips are still readily available. The statute expires in September 2004, and the fight for making the statute permanent or allowing it to expire has already begun.

    ...
    Nearly all handguns are designed for self-defense, or to put it plainly - to kill people. Although actually firing a gun in self-defense is rare, the presence of a lethal weapon in a home has become increasingly necessary in a world fraught with peril.
    ...
    Gun ownership is perhaps the decisive expression of personal freedom. In the area of protection of life and property, liberals lean toward government over individual decision-making. Yet police forces deter crime merely in the general sense and only infrequently are able to prevent specific acts of violence.

    Dialing 911 does not drive back an immediate threat, especially during a period of widespread anarchy. But the simple display of a gun, by even a diminutive grandmother, will send intruders fleeing.

    Thus, no rational family should be without a weapon, with every member over the age of perhaps 12 trained in its use and care.
    ...

    The question comes down to which weapon. Probably the optimum gun for the defense of a home is the civilian version of the military M-l6 (e.g. Colt AR 15 Sporter, ArmaLite AR-10, others). Of course, this is the last weapon gun-control activists want in the possession of the average citizen.

    http://cgi.citizen-times.com/cgi-bin/story/35148
     
  2. pintail21

    pintail21 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    6,320
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    Richland, Washington/ Moscow, Idaho
    finally a decently intelligent lawyer:D :cool: :cool:
     
  3. deadgreenhead

    deadgreenhead Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    698
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Location:
    Texas, the greatest state in the nation before all
    With that logic, I think I understand why he "retired." :l
     
  4. 20gabismuth

    20gabismuth Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    5,050
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2003
    Location:
    Texas Gulf Coast

    Sounds perfectly logical to me..................I guess if you had it your way, we'd be throwing rocks at waterfowl!!!!! :mad:
     
  5. deadgreenhead

    deadgreenhead Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    698
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Location:
    Texas, the greatest state in the nation before all
    And what does this have to do with waterfowling again?
     
  6. WoodieSC

    WoodieSC North/South Carolina Flyway Forum Moderator Flyway Manager

    Messages:
    19,559
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2000
    Location:
    SC
    Please enlighten us with your recommendations on personal defense of self, family and home. I'd like to train my wife to defend herself without firearms. Keep in mind she's only 5'2" and 105 lbs, so she may need to defend herself against someone over twice her size.
     
  7. 20gabismuth

    20gabismuth Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    5,050
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2003
    Location:
    Texas Gulf Coast
    DGH, I'm not gonna sit here and debate GUN CONTROL with you!! You know damn good and well the two go hand in hand. All the gun control freaks need on this issue is a foothold, and their off and running. Self defense, sport shooting, hunting.........doesn't matter to them!! I saw in a post on a different thread that gun control freaks are not complacent, damn right they're not!! And I'm not going to be either in my personal beliefs or fight as well!! Bottom line, for me and IMO, is criminals are going to get weapons irregardless. Why should I, a law abiding citizen and multiple gun owner, let a bunch of bleeding hearts slowly take them, or that right away from me!! Remeber DGH................

    The Right to keep and bear arms!!!!:D
     
  8. deadgreenhead

    deadgreenhead Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    698
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Location:
    Texas, the greatest state in the nation before all
    Woodie, would you please try to maintain a sense of humor here? I promise to do it if you promise to do it. If we can't, I'm not sure we are going to be able to talk.

    My comment regarding the logic used by the "lawyer" in the post regarded the following statement (upon which the entirety of this fallacious opinion piece rests): "Although actually firing a gun in self-defense is rare, the presence of a lethal weapon in a home has become increasingly necessary in a world fraught with peril."

    The reasoning in this rather poor question-begging set-up statement is deeply flawed. In fact, it fails to even rise to the level of reasoning at all. I seriously doubt I need to explain to anyone why that is the case, least of all probably not to you.

    Switching subjects, you have asked me to recommend a way you and your family can defend itself. I recommend a .20, .16 or .12 guage shotgun. I also think a pump is better a self-defense weapon than other shotguns. For your wife, I think you might want to try a lighter gun, perhaps an automatic to reduce recoil, and have the gun personally fitted to her frame. I don't know what to tell you about "training" her without a gun. Mine never liked to be trained by me for any reason at all. But our dogs are awfully protective of her and make a hell of a lot of noise whenever someone they don't know is around. That's another option for you. Dogs.

    20gabismuth, that's always been the thing I love most about belief systems, they require no facts!
     
  9. Penns-Woods

    Penns-Woods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    563
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Location:
    Shippensburg, PA
    Perhaps you should read John Lott's two books before you post how this reasoning is deeply flawed.

    Warning, there are a lot of statistics in the books.
     
  10. deadgreenhead

    deadgreenhead Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    698
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Location:
    Texas, the greatest state in the nation before all
    You do realize we were discussing this opinion piece and not some book by the highly controversial, widely discredited and hardly unbiased John Lott? I didn't know this article had anything to do with John Lott's books or the statistics contained therein. I don't see any mention of them by this author anywhere at all. But your offering to shore the piece up speaks volumes, doesn't it? I agree, perhaps this person writing out this piece should have tried to substantiate his opinion with *some* reference to facts rather than relying upon great logical leaps and loops of faith as though they are a given. In any event, laying aside your gracious attempt to rescue the author from oversight, the piece stands on its own.

    Perhaps too, you should think more carefully and more particulalry about what I'm saying before you start taking shots at me. You have a great tendency to go off topic when trying to get in your digs. I think if you do, you will be able to stay more focused in any conversation you follow me to, and that way any comments you might have will start to become more relevant. Just a thought.
     

Share This Page