Guns?

[FZR1KG]

Regarding your long post, I'll just break it down for simplicity.

And here's the crux of my point: all that statistical stuff above? It's meant to show that your chances of getting killed by a bear are tiny, no matter who we consider to be the relevant population. Tinier than your chances of being shot by the gun you have to protect you from bears. That's the real point. Having a handgun to protect from bears is more likely to kill you than not having one. So why the hell is that a good law?

That's the calculation I've been harping on this entire thread, by the way: look at your policy, then weigh the benefits against the drawbacks. If it's more beneficial than otherwise, it's good policy. If it isn't, it's bad policy. To base policy formulation on anything other than this calculation is irrational.

You're not comparing the numbers correctly.
Unless you think that every handgun owner is using the, handgun is protection from bears reason.
What you're doing is comparing the total statistics of all gun injuries to the number of people killed by bears.
Only a small fraction of the hand gun owners will want a handgun for protection in the wilderness.
You're lumping in them with the total. Since that number is significantly smaller the comparison is invalid.

That's why there are things called exceptions. What you're doing is invalidating any exception right at the start based on the global correlation that less guns = less gun deaths.

I pretty much agree. Though I would add that since it's so startlingly unlikely you'll be harmed by a bear, and since it's so much more likely you'll be harmed by your own gun... maybe having the gun to protect yourself from bears is idiotic. And maybe any loosening of regulations with the purpose of allowing people to have guns to protect themselves from bears is thus also equally idiotic. It's just bad public policy.

Same thing I just pointed out, but I'll give you the opportunity to find me any data that states people who have a handgun for protection in the wilderness are more likely to kill themselves than save themselves.
Don't give me the global hope, I want specifics.
I gave you a specific reason for owning a handgun, give me a specific reason why they will injure those handgun owners at a higher rate than save them.

I've been shooting for about 40 years now and not once have I come close to being killed by my weapons even though they were constantly around me and I was using them. Since I'm from Australia they didn't save me from any bears but had I been raised in Alaska I'm betting they would. Mind you I have been saved by a firearm.

Yep. That's precisely the regulation I'm arguing in favour of. Well, okay, I go a bit further than that, admittedly. Special handgun course and exam, a special class of licence for handguns, restrictions on storage, restrictions on transportation, restrictions on transfer of ownership, restrictions on where you're allowed to have the thing, mandatory registration, and absolutely no carrying it on your person (concealed or open) without a special permit obtained by convincing the regulator that you genuinely need to do so (say you're a Brinks truck guard or whatever).

I have no problem regulating and enforcing training as well as limiting concealed and open carry practices.
Where I have a problem is when someone tells me I can't protect myself because of laws that are so broad and anal they don't allow any exceptions even to small segments of the population by law makers who write laws that directly lead to deaths, bear (ha!!) no responsibility and claim it's all for the greater good.

I'm all for the greater good.
Telling me that somehow me owning a handgun is more likely to result in my death due to my own incompetence than it will protect me in a wilderness area against a predator is not the greater good. Its arrogance, and micro managing my risk combined with the unwillingness to take responsibility for the repercussions even if fatal.

So tell me, if I applied to get a handgun for the specific reason that I want protection while I'm in the wilderness where there are dangerous animals, how anyone can turn around and say, you can't have one because there's been too many school yard massacres in the city makes any sense whatsoever?

Now that you have data that shows that they have prevented deaths, does this change your position?
If not, how many people being saved per year by handguns will it take before it's considered legitimate by you?
From what I'm reading it seems there would have to be more lives saved than there are lives lost in the entire USA by firearms before you would consider it.
For me one is enough. It's a specific reason and limited to a small group. It has no nearing on global statistics across the USA.
Just like Australia, every time a shooting happened in the USA they tightened shooting laws. Oddly, it was then the massacres started.
The global US statistics don't relate to specific remote situations like wilderness protection any more than Australia's laws need changing by what happens in the USA.

[FZR1KG]

Hmm, I think I may have worked out where our differences lie.
When you hear, hiking, National Park, what do you see?
If it's a group of people in a camp site with a tent/RV maintained by park rangers or hotels inn a National Park, we see two completely different things.
If that's what you're imagining then I actually agree with you. There is very little need for a firearm and the likelihood of injuring someone else is pretty high.

What I think of when I go hiking or to a forest is going deep in the wooded areas where no one has been for years or decades.
Where getting help would required a mini task force.

What you're thinking of is tourists, I'm thinking of bushmen.
e.g. I go shooting in Australia on a farmers property that's pretty large and parts are heavily wooded.
He has about 55,000 acres. We actually have access to close to 400,000 acres because we are also permitted on the surrounding properties.
We went exploring one day deep into the bush. It was a long drawn out affair, many stops, tree's moved to get access etc.
A day's labour to travel basically a about 3 miles. It was that thick.
When we got back to the farmers property we told him where we went.
His response was that since he was a boy, and his father was a boy, no one had gone there but he'd heard rumors of what was there.
We found old ruined buildings, old fence lines etc. We'd gone where no one had been since the early 1900's.
There is no cell phone reception there, no easy access to help as it was about 30 miles from his main property.
That's what I think of when I say going bush. Minimal supplies.
I've been known to take a canteen of water, no food, one gun and a box of ammo, before the days of cell's and GPS and go for a few weeks.
While I don't consider myself a true bushman, I don't consider myself a tourist either.
You can take my word for it or not, but surviving under such conditions is not easy and you need all the help you can get.
This was in a land of no large predators...except dogs. Got some issues with dogs being released in national parks by fuckwits let me tell you.
If I was to do the same thing here in bear country, no one in their right mind would say, you can't take a handgun because you may endanger yourself or someone else.
Which is why I was trying to understand your objection.

[FZR1KG]

You know, all this talk of guns makes me miss shooting.
To me shooting is about skill, perseverance and endurance.
i understand that may not be what it is to other "hunters/shooters" but that's what it is to me.
I no longer have a licence to shoot in Australia because the stupid laws there state that because I'm out of the country at the time my licence is up for renewal I can't renew and have to sell my firearms. one's I've owned for over 20 years. One which was given as a present when I graduated by my father. One of the few nice things he did for me knowing I was a keen shooter and given all the other shit he'd pt me through he did teach me firearm safety and hunting morals.
Now I have no firearm. I'm in a country where I don't want to go hunting because of the crazies. I mean that in the nicest possible way, but, when avid experienced shooters trained in the military for long range shooting refuse to hunt in the local district due to the idiots here, I pay attention.

So here's a story that I recall back in my good ol days of shooting.
My mate and I used to go shooting every Friday.
I met him while I was a lecturer in engineering and he was my student.
He watched me put a nutter shooter in his place during class and approached me afterwards because he liked that I knew guns.
Long story short, his family is a bunch of keen shooters.
He's actually a really good competitive shooter now.
Not sure if he's Olympic class or not but last I checked he was using a gun that cost 50% of what I got for the house we sold and was doing good.

i taught him to shoot long distance. Started with a .22LR at 100 yards.
That's long for anyone in the know.
Extended that to 200 yards.
That's extreme if anyone's interested.
Peaked at about 250 yards and at that point the accuracy was no longer viable on rabbit sized game, 0.5 MOA at 250 yards gives about 1.25 inches in diameter but the precision required for range determination made that seem like it was nothing. head shooting rabbits just wasn't cutting it.

So we went to center fire .223 and 220 swift (not that swift he's a frog) to increase the range.
i was using a heavy barreled .223 because I liked the cheap ammo.
My mate was using the swift because he liked the flat trajectory as it made long distance work possible.
Mind you, I was shooting rabbits in the head at over 300 yards with mine as it was.

The longest shot he ever pulled was 850 yards on a rabbit while I ranged and spotted for him.
That's some serious distance with a 22 caliber.

When I met him his range was about 50 yards with a .22LR because that was what he was taught.
Now he shoots twenty times that distance with various weapons.

Anyway, he changed classes so that he's be in my class on a Thursday so he'd get Friday free. I had Friday free because in Uni you get 20 contact hours and the rest is your prep/work time. So I had Friday's free and so did he. That meant every single Friday for a year we went shooting.

Now when you go shooting with someone, you literally place your life in their hands and visa versa.
Anyone that doesn't understand that need not ever own, use, touch or look at a weapon ever again because you are too damned dumb to safely use it.

But when you get two really keen and long time experienced shooters together it's almost like magic.
You learn each others steps, moves, and are so acutely aware of what the other is doing it's crazy.
After shooting so long with the one guy we both got to know what the other was about to do without talking or signalling.

in the movies you see the army guys use all these fancy signals. There was none here. i knew what he was doing, he knew what I was doing well before we could signal.
Sure we started signalling but that quickly faded to being too slow and obsolete.

Several times we spotted game at the same time or one would notice the other noticing game and both would respond in a silent but united purpose, to bring it down.
Two times stand out where both of us spotted game, got in position and fired so simultaneously we couldn't tell if the other fired or not. The suspicion was there because the sound is slightly off but it's really hard to tell if two shots were fired at the same time if you are one o the shooters.
Both times we hit the target. Both times the impact was within 1/2 an inch.
The response time from spotting the game to firing was less than two seconds. It seems far shorter but that's about the time it takes to drop and pull off a long distance shot. Lots of mental calculation to be done in a short time and that doesn't come fast, nor does going from standing to prone.
Now that I think about it, it's something that won't happen again.
My eyesight isn't what it used to be. My reflexes aren't what they were once and i am missing the most important aspect of shooting, regular practice.
It's been a long time now since I've had regular practice shooting.

What scares me the most is that when the USA falls apart and the zombie apocalypse hits, I won't be prepared to protect my fellow FWISers.
I mean seriously TSC, how the fuck am I meant to protect you when that happens if I can't even train with a hand gun.
It's just fucking wrong.
I have to go get one when all the national computers are down and licensing checks aren't responding.
It means I'll probably have to kill someone to get their gun so I can protect you.
Then I have to get to Canada, find your sorry ass and then somehow get you to safety AND teach you to use firearms because you've had your head up your ass so long you don't realise that the zombie apocalypse is imminent. I mean I might have to fight cops just to get a hand gun and that shit just ain't right.

Other than Yosh, Fisher, Brite none of you have the foresight to learn what to do in such an event!!!
Iky would know but he has lost half his brain and when you start with less than half, that's not really a good thing so we can't count on him anymore.
Yosh was in the airforce, which means that he'd be half as effective as Iky in his current state asleep and intoxicated.
Fisher is not a hands on rifle man, though he may be sneaky and not be telling me he's been training for this.
brite is the wildcard. She's either going to come in and blow the fuck out of anything undead or go down in a flame of glory.

Once we've done all the USA we have to get to Europe and save Rommie's ass.
Thankfully I have a boat. Fitting a bunch of FWISers on it might present a few challenges however.

See what you're doing TSC?
You're fucking up my zombie apocalypse scenario.
AND I DON'T LIKE IT!

[Sigma_Orionis]

Don't worry bout me, there's no way the Zombie Apocalypse will ever hit here.

[SciFi Chick]

Other than Yosh, Fisher, Brite none of you have the foresight to learn what to do in such an event!!!

I can only assume you've taken the whole "becoming one in marriage" thing very literally at this point, since we both know I am well prepared in what to do when the zombie apocalypse comes around.

[SciFi Chick]

Don't worry bout me, there's no way the Zombie Apocalypse will ever hit here.

How would you be able to tell if the Zombie Apocalypse did hit where you live? I mean, what would be different from now?

[Sigma_Orionis]

Good!, I see you were paying attention

[SciFiFisher]

You know, all this talk of guns makes me miss shooting.
What scares me the most is that when the USA falls apart and the zombie apocalypse hits, I won't be prepared to protect my fellow FWISers.
I mean seriously TSC, how the fuck am I meant to protect you when that happens if I can't even train with a hand gun.
It's just fucking wrong.
I have to go get one when all the national computers are down and licensing checks aren't responding.
It means I'll probably have to kill someone to get their gun so I can protect you.
Then I have to get to Canada, find your sorry ass and then somehow get you to safety AND teach you to use firearms because you've had your head up your ass so long you don't realise that the zombie apocalypse is imminent. I mean I might have to fight cops just to get a hand gun and that shit just ain't right.

Other than Yosh, Fisher, Brite none of you have the foresight to learn what to do in such an event!!!
Iky would know but he has lost half his brain and when you start with less than half, that's not really a good thing so we can't count on him anymore.
Yosh was in the airforce, which means that he'd be half as effective as Iky in his current state asleep and intoxicated.
Fisher is not a hands on rifle man, though he may be sneaky and not be telling me he's been training for this.
brite is the wildcard. She's either going to come in and blow the fuck out of anything undead or go down in a flame of glory.

Once we've done all the USA we have to get to Europe and save Rommie's ass.
Thankfully I have a boat. Fitting a bunch of FWISers on it might present a few challenges however.

See what you're doing TSC?
You're fucking up my zombie apocalypse scenario.
AND I DON'T LIKE IT!

The last time I practiced I was still fair at 50-150 meters with an M-16 on man sized targets. That was a few years ago though. These days they insist that I have to be a fair shot with the M-9 pistol but I only have to prove it once every 2-3 years. Cuz I am an officer and medical. They figure that if we get to the point where I have to man the barricades we is all screwed.

But, don't worry. I gotcher back come the zombie apocylpse.

[brite]

Just so you know... he's either planning on eating the dogs first... or killing them first (just to keep them from turning into zombies)... he's afraid that they will eat his brains....

[Yosh]

See, I think the problem goes back way before the NRA. I blame the idiot Founders who wrote the second amendment. And I blame the fact that the US was a country created at the barrel of a gun.

The problem is the Revolution, as far as I'm concerned. It's had bad cultural effects on Americans that continue down to today.

Had a somewhat long winded reply, citing CDC "death by firearm" data showing a continuous drop from 1970 to present. Was going all ape-shit on TSC's assertion we'd all be much better off if we were complacent little citizens of the "Empire."

Thought better of it.

Not worth wrecking a friendship over.

[Rommie]

Was going all ape-shit on TSC's assertion we'd all be much better off if we were complacent little citizens of the "Empire."

Yeah, well what do you expect from a Canadian. He's still a subject of the Queen!

[Yosh]

Other than Yosh, Fisher, Brite none of you have the foresight to learn what to do in such an event!!!
Iky would know but he has lost half his brain and when you start with less than half, that's not really a good thing so we can't count on him anymore.
Yosh was in the airforce, which means that he'd be half as effective as Iky in his current state asleep and intoxicated.
Fisher is not a hands on rifle man, though he may be sneaky and not be telling me he's been training for this.
brite is the wildcard. She's either going to come in and blow the fuck out of anything undead or go down in a flame of glory.

Hey there, I was an elite, SAC-trained killer. I guarded me some nookyouler weapons, I did. Qualified on M-16, M-60, and M-203. Plus a couple of pistols.

So, I'm at least as good as Iky with half his brain, but awake, dammit!!!!

[FZR1KG]

Had a somewhat long winded reply, citing CDC "death by firearm" data showing a continuous drop from 1970 to present. Was going all ape-shit on TSC's assertion we'd all be much better off if we were complacent little citizens of the "Empire."

Of course, you know that the NRA and many pro gunners were for years saying the statistics supported that gun laws made no difference in gun deaths.
So no decline in gun deaths is a case for not regulating guns.
Now they state that statistics show declining deaths due to firearms.
So now a decline in gun deaths is a case for not regulating firearms.

Conclusion: No matter what the data shows, if your mind is made up the data will support your decision.
Which is why we have the same data being used as evidence by both sides pro and against as supporting their case.

e.g. Declining numbers means that regulations are working.

Any wonder no one can see the forest for the bears. Tree's. i meant to say trees.

Thought better of it.

Not worth wrecking a friendship over.

I'm sure TSC is a big boy and can support his views rationally without going into meltdown.

[FZR1KG]

Other than Yosh, Fisher, Brite none of you have the foresight to learn what to do in such an event!!!
Iky would know but he has lost half his brain and when you start with less than half, that's not really a good thing so we can't count on him anymore.
Yosh was in the airforce, which means that he'd be half as effective as Iky in his current state asleep and intoxicated.
Fisher is not a hands on rifle man, though he may be sneaky and not be telling me he's been training for this.
brite is the wildcard. She's either going to come in and blow the fuck out of anything undead or go down in a flame of glory.

Hey there, I was an elite, SAC-trained killer. I guarded me some nookyouler weapons, I did. Qualified on M-16, M-60, and M-203. Plus a couple of pistols.

So, I'm at least as good as Iky with half his brain, but awake, dammit!!!!

I dunno Yosh. I've seen military trained guys that can barely shoot a man sized target at 25 yards with a high caliber rifle.
just recently I was told by a young woman that she trained in firearms with the Navy and got expert.
I asked her how far she was shooting.
She didn't know. They put the targets out and she shot at them and got them.
okie dokie...

Not saying you can't shoot Yosh, ok, yes I am. lol
What I'm saying is, if you want to be a member of this anti zombie task force, you have to prove you can shoot.
That means you have to come down one day and demonstrate this alleged ability.
Till that happens, you'll be a junior.
You should have joined the marines.

[brite]

Think of the Marines as the Hulk... Hulk smash. The Army, on the other hand is the brains of the outfit. The Air Farce is there for decoration....

[FZR1KG]

Yeah, that may be, but at least the marines can shoot. Every single one of them can shoot. Got to respect that.
Air force I'm not sure.
Mind you this is all so we can have fun at Yosh's expense but it's worth it!

[Yosh]

Yeah, that may be, but at least the marines can shoot. Every single one of them can shoot. Got to respect that.
Air force I'm not sure.
Mind you this is all so we can have fun at Yosh's expense but it's worth it!

I would not draw the ire of my brothers and sisters in the Corp by claiming I have their expertise.

But I can generally hit what I'm aiming at...at distances further than 25 yards.

[geonuc]

just recently I was told by a young woman that she trained in firearms with the Navy and got expert.
I asked her how far she was shooting.
She didn't know. They put the targets out and she shot at them and got them.
okie dokie...

The navy ... once a year we had to go to the range and 'qualify' on the .45. Which meant unloading two magazines in the general direction of downrange. But, hey, I'm sure there are expert shooters in the navy (SEALS are a service all to themselves, in my mind, so they don't count).

Mind you, my outfit was pretty good with our other weapons.

[FZR1KG]

That's really sad.
Though I imagine close quarter combat for the Navy is ranges starting at tens of miles. lol

[geonuc]

That's really sad.
Though I imagine close quarter combat for the Navy is ranges starting at tens of miles. lol

Or in the case of the boat I was on, a couple of thousand miles.

[The Supreme Canuck]

Hi, all. I think I'm going to withdraw from this thread - you've probably noticed I've been gone from FWIS for a while. (Two weeks? Crap.) Well, that's because this thread kind of twigged my anxiety. Here's how that works:

"Ugh. When I log on to FWIS today, I need to go back into that gun discussion that I'm really not enjoying anymore and that's causing me some stress. Maybe I'll log on later."

Later: "Ugh. When I log on to FWIS today, I need to go back into that gun discussion that I'm really not enjoying anymore and that's causing me some stress. Maybe I'll log on later."

And so on, which leads to me just not being here for a fortnight. I realize that seems stupid and like it's a cop-out, but that's precisely the avoidance mechanism that drives my anxiety-related procrastination.

So, yeah, sorry FZ - gonna have to pull out of this one for mental health reasons. The argument is stressing me out a bit. Can you imagine why I decided against being a lawyer?

Though I do want to say to Yosh: Dude. Do you really think there's anything you can say about gun politics that would jeopardize our friendship in any way? Come on, now.

Also, for the record, I never said that the US was a bad idea or that Americans should just have sat down and obeyed Mad King George. I said that the way that you folks went about gaining independence had drawbacks that could have been avoided if you had done something else. I'd be happy to go into that in a different thread, if you want.

[FZR1KG]

Don't worry about it TSC.
It's not worth the stress.
Besides, there are so many easier things to tackle that we might be able to actually do something about, like say, peace in the Middle East.

[Yosh]

Hi, all. I think I'm going to withdraw from this thread - you've probably noticed I've been gone from FWIS for a while. (Two weeks? Crap.) Well, that's because this thread kind of twigged my anxiety. Here's how that works:

"Ugh. When I log on to FWIS today, I need to go back into that gun discussion that I'm really not enjoying anymore and that's causing me some stress. Maybe I'll log on later."

Later: "Ugh. When I log on to FWIS today, I need to go back into that gun discussion that I'm really not enjoying anymore and that's causing me some stress. Maybe I'll log on later."

And so on, which leads to me just not being here for a fortnight. I realize that seems stupid and like it's a cop-out, but that's precisely the avoidance mechanism that drives my anxiety-related procrastination.

So, yeah, sorry FZ - gonna have to pull out of this one for mental health reasons. The argument is stressing me out a bit. Can you imagine why I decided against being a lawyer?

Though I do want to say to Yosh: Dude. Do you really think there's anything you can say about gun politics that would jeopardize our friendship in any way? Come on, now.

Also, for the record, I never said that the US was a bad idea or that Americans should just have sat down and obeyed Mad King George. I said that the way that you folks went about gaining independence had drawbacks that could have been avoided if you had done something else. I'd be happy to go into that in a different thread, if you want.

TSC: Actually, the rant I squashed wasn't going to touch on guns at all. You hit a different "jitter trigger."

Ain't no thing. Leave this be, hang with the stuff that's more enjoyable to talk about.

[SciFi Chick]

Hi, all. I think I'm going to withdraw from this thread - you've probably noticed I've been gone from FWIS for a while. (Two weeks? Crap.) Well, that's because this thread kind of twigged my anxiety. Here's how that works:

"Ugh. When I log on to FWIS today, I need to go back into that gun discussion that I'm really not enjoying anymore and that's causing me some stress. Maybe I'll log on later."

Later: "Ugh. When I log on to FWIS today, I need to go back into that gun discussion that I'm really not enjoying anymore and that's causing me some stress. Maybe I'll log on later."

And so on, which leads to me just not being here for a fortnight. I realize that seems stupid and like it's a cop-out, but that's precisely the avoidance mechanism that drives my anxiety-related procrastination.

Shit. I'm starting to think I might have same kind of anxiety you do.

Glad you're back btw!

[The Supreme Canuck]

FZ: Thanks - though I do feel kind of bad about bailing on you like that. I need to get a handle on this shit.

Yosh: Sounds good to me. Also, I do get that I can come on pretty strong about tetchy subjects. I hope I didn't piss you off too bad. I swear my actual thoughts are a little more nuanced than "Thomas Jefferson was a right bastard."

SFC: Thanks! And if we are in the same boat, I'd love to hear how you deal with it. Being both interested in discussing controversial things and conflict-averse is a bad mix.