# Which caliber is best for stopping a crook? Pistol, rifle or shotgun?



## Otis Mayfield (Oct 31, 2021)

Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.

The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


----------



## Meister (Oct 31, 2021)

Glock 43, good for C&C and a good weapon for protection


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Crook close up..shotgun..crook more that 30ft..rifle--handguns are for personal protection..closer the better..but..many's the gun fight that has had dozens of rounds fired..and no hits. A well trained dog is just as good, if not better, for home protection...IMO.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Are you feeling okay?  Has your account been taken over?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? 


If the gun doesnt stop the perp, the bikini sure will.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


.380 ACP is a perfectly appropriate self-defense round; I carry a 380 auto when I pocket carry.


----------



## mudwhistle (Oct 31, 2021)

Best thing I know for home defense is a 12 gauge with a light so you just point and shoot. Put the light where you want it to go. I'd use birdshot....#4 or #7. The main thing is stopping power without too much penetration.


----------



## Donald H (Oct 31, 2021)

As always, no gun is better than having any gun if the objective is to live to see sunset. 






						Does a Gun Make Your Home Safer? | SafeWise
					

Research shows that having a gun at home does not make us safer. SafeWise looks at the latest studies on gun safety.




					www.safewise.com
				






> *Statistically, having a gun in your home is more dangerous for you and your family, especially if you have young children or teens. A 2014 review in the Annals of Internal Medicine concluded having a firearm in the home, even when it’s properly stored, doubles your risk of becoming a victim of homicide and triples the risk of suicide.3*


----------



## Crepitus (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?



I usually carry an lcp 9.  I have the .380 versions as well.  It's so small I can drop it in a pocket and go.

Rifles are a terrible weapon for home defense.


----------



## Esdraelon (Oct 31, 2021)

Donald H said:


> As always, no gun is better than having any gun if the objective is to live to see sunset.


Yeah... you go with that. The gene pool can do without ya just fine.  The truth is you can find "data" to support anything you already believe.  IMO, those who push against 2A do so for political reasons and either already have security provided for them OR have never faced a situation where no cop was coming to help them and they KNEW IT.  New Orleans, post-Katrina is a perfect example.  

Eventually, you'll find yourself living in a world totally *W*ithout *R*ule *O*f *L*aw.  It's on the horizon right now, in fact.  In THAT world there will be predators and prey.  The choices made now will determine which group you inhabit and for how long.  Choose well...


----------



## Esdraelon (Oct 31, 2021)

Crepitus said:


> I usually carry an lcp 9.  I have the .380 versions as well.  It's so small I can drop it in a pocket and go.
> 
> Rifles are a terrible weapon for home defense.


I used to carry the LCP .380 but I decided to carry a Sig P365 SAS version in 9 mm.  It's a pure pocket gun in 9 mm.  The SAS stands for "Sig Anti Snag".  The sights are rather odd but effective.  There are no raised contact points like front or rear sight posts or any safety or magazine buttons that can snag coming out of a pocket.  It also has a couple of venting ports near the muzzle to reduce the flip of recoil.  I carry it for self defense and practice with it no farther away from a target than 3 steps.  

I disagree about rifles being all bad for home defense.  An AR-15 is the PERFECT home defense weapon for most women, due to the near lack of recoil.  The only caveat to that would be for those living in apartments rather than homes with some distance between them.  That's just my opinion, of course.  
The very best gun for self defense is a gun you TRAIN WITH and learn to handle safely.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 31, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Best thing I know for home defense is a 12 gauge with a light so you just point and shoot. Put the light where you want it to go. I'd use birdshot....#4 or #7. The main thing is stopping power without too much penetration.





mudwhistle said:


> The main thing is stopping power without too much penetration.



Thats what she said....


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Oct 31, 2021)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Crook close up..shotgun..crook more that 30ft..rifle--handguns are for personal protection..closer the better..but..many's the gun fight that has had dozens of rounds fired..and no hits. A well trained dog is just as good, if not better, for home protection...IMO.



   I can drop you at 100 yards with a shotgun.
And no a dog isn't just as good unless you taught them how to shoot.
   A dog is good for alerting you and thats it.

     Liberals dont know shit about firearms as you've just displayed.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Oct 31, 2021)

andaronjim said:


> Which gun do you think has the most stopping power?
> 
> 
> If the gun doesnt stop the perp, the bikini sure will.



  It's hard to believe that she's over 50.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 31, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> It's hard to believe that she's over 50.


No it's not.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Oct 31, 2021)

WillHaftawaite said:


> No it's not.



  How many 50 year old women do you know who look that good?


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 31, 2021)

If she didn't have that bra on, her knees would be hidden behind her nipples


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Oct 31, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I can drop you at 100 yards with a shotgun.
> And no a dog isn't just as good unless you taught them how to shoot.
> A dog is good for alerting you and thats it.
> 
> Liberals dont know shit about firearms as you've just displayed.


Uh-huh..sure..keep thinking that political party or ideological position somehow equates to some sort of innate skill with firearms..dumbass~
I know dogs that would rip your throat out..while you piss yourself and fire your weapon into the floor. just sayin'--a guy is a lot more frantic..with 120 lbs of dog attached to him.
All your post goes to show is that being a fool is a non-political affair.

You don't need squat that shoots 100 yards for home defense. If the perp is fleeing..ya stop shooting..unless you like jail~


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Oct 31, 2021)

WillHaftawaite said:


> If she didn't have that bra on, her knees would be hidden behind her nipples



  Have you never seen her in a bikini?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?



Rifles, then shotguns, then handguns.....the order of usefulness in stopping criminals.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Oct 31, 2021)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Uh-huh..sure..keep thinking that political party or ideological position somehow equates to some sort of innate skill with firearms..dumbass~
> I know dogs that would rip your throat out..while you piss yourself and fire your weapon into the floor. just sayin'--a guy is a lot more frantic..with 120 lbs of dog attached to him.
> All your post goes to show is that being a fool is a non-political affair.
> 
> You don't need squat that shoots 100 yards for home defense. If the perp is fleeing..ya stop shooting..unless you like jail~



  LOL....you use your dog,and I'll shoot it.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Oct 31, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> LOL....you use your dog,and I'll shoot it.


Life ain't always how you script it..but while you shooting my dog...I'll be shooting you---so i guess that's how it goes...LOL!


----------



## Crepitus (Oct 31, 2021)

ESDRAELON said:


> I used to carry the LCP .380 but I decided to carry a Sig P365 SAS version in 9 mm.  It's a pure pocket gun in 9 mm.  The SAS stands for "Sig Anti Snag".  The sights are rather odd but effective.  There are no raised contact points like front or rear sight posts or any safety or magazine buttons that can snag coming out of a pocket.  It also has a couple of venting ports near the muzzle to reduce the flip of recoil.  I carry it for self defense and practice with it no farther away from a target than 3 steps.
> 
> I disagree about rifles being all bad for home defense.  An AR-15 is the PERFECT home defense weapon for most women, due to the near lack of recoil.  The only caveat to that would be for those living in apartments rather than homes with some distance between them.  That's just my opinion, of course.
> The very best gun for self defense is a gun you TRAIN WITH and learn to handle safely.


Rifles are bad because of over penetration and how they limit your mobility.

The sig is ok, but the lcp is more durable.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


The most powerful caliber the shooter can handle, is the best caliber.


----------



## whitehall (Oct 31, 2021)

The phrase "stopping a crook" has several meanings and several venues. Most firearm related incidents that "stop a crook" involve the mere brandishing of a weapon. As far as a homeowner confronting a potential burglar in the middle of the night nothing does it better than the big muzzle of a shotgun. You can get a single barrel shotgun for a reasonable price and cut the barrel down to a legal federal limit and load that bad boy up with #4 duck loads and you have a kickass weapon.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Oct 31, 2021)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Life ain't always how you script it..but while you shooting my dog...I'll be shooting you---so i guess that's how it goes...LOL!



  LOL...everything doesn't always work out like you think.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Oct 31, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> LOL...everything doesn't always work out like you think.


Words to live by~


----------



## marvin martian (Oct 31, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?



Just call the police, gun nut.


----------



## fncceo (Oct 31, 2021)

I would submit that, in most situations,  a shotgun. 

It's an intimidating weapon.  It has lots of potential stopping power, and the least chance for a missed shot going through a wall to harm innocents.

Down side,  not appropriate as a carry weapon.  No easy, or legal, to conceal.


----------



## HenryBHough (Oct 31, 2021)

The 14-gauge with sabot rounds has proven efficient.  Not at all heavy; Moderate kick though the barrel being cut to 18-1/8 inch might be somewhat to blame on that account.  Works good on bears, too.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 1, 2021)

There are far too many open variables to answer this question.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 1, 2021)

fncceo said:


> I would submit that, in most situations,  a shotgun.
> 
> It's an intimidating weapon.  It has lots of potential stopping power, and the least chance for a missed shot going through a wall to harm innocents.
> 
> Down side,  not appropriate as a carry weapon.  No easy, or legal, to conceal.



  And lack of capacity as well.

I'm most likely going to pick up my FNX .45 Tactical since it holds 16 rounds and has a laser so you dont actually have to aim with sights.
   And since my house is all brick I could grab the AR and not worry about killing my neighbors. Of course I'd have to make sure the soon to be dead guy isnt standing in front of a window.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 1, 2021)

whitehall said:


> The phrase "stopping a crook" has several meanings and several venues. Most firearm related incidents that "stop a crook" involve the mere brandishing of a weapon. As far as a homeowner confronting a potential burglar in the middle of the night nothing does it better than the big muzzle of a shotgun. You can get a single barrel shotgun for a reasonable price and cut the barrel down to a legal federal limit and load that bad boy up with #4 duck loads and you have a kickass weapon.



  Thats my wife's gun but she has it in an 870 Wingmaster.
Her dad cut it to 18 and 1/8 and put the bead back on and gave it to her when she moved to Houston from the major metropolis of Bedias Texas with an astounding population of 443 people.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 1, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> .380 ACP is a perfectly appropriate self-defense round; I carry a 380 auto when I pocket carry.



With the newer ammo a .380ACP is perfectly adequate.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 1, 2021)

When I carry, I carry a Springfield M1911.   Good stopping power in an accurate enough round for self protection.   And being so slim it is easy to carry concealed.

At home my g/f and I each have a .357 revolver in our nightstand.   The first round will be .38 Special shotshell, and the next 5 will be 158 gr MagSafe rounds.   No over penetration.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 1, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> With the newer ammo a .380ACP is perfectly adequate.



    I'd still feel better with a larger caliber but you cant beat how compact they can be.
Hitting a 4 in. plate at 50 ft is easy,I was shocked to say the least.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 1, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> With the newer ammo a .380ACP is perfectly adequate.


All handgun rounds are a compromise of some sort; if the only gun you can carry is a pocket-sized .380, then that's fine.
If you can carry and use a full-size auto, then .380 is a poor choice.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 1, 2021)

I also have a Marlin lever action in .44 Mag that would make a good self defense gun.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 1, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I'd still feel better with a larger caliber but you cant beat how compact they can be.
> Hitting a 4 in. plate at 50 ft is easy,I was shocked to say the least.
> 
> View attachment 559166



Having grown up reading Elmer Keith, Bill Jordan and Col. Jeff Cooper, I thought .380s were underpowered too.   And, at the time, they were.   But the ammo companies listened and have provided better ammo.  Not my personal choice, but still a good one.


----------



## marvin martian (Nov 1, 2021)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Life ain't always how you script it..but while you shooting my dog...I'll be shooting you---so i guess that's how it goes...LOL!



Enjoy prison.


----------



## TeeDub (Nov 1, 2021)

whitehall said:


> The phrase "stopping a crook" has several meanings and several venues. Most firearm related incidents that "stop a crook" involve the mere brandishing of a weapon. As far as a homeowner confronting a potential burglar in the middle of the night nothing does it better than the big muzzle of a shotgun. You can get a single barrel shotgun for a reasonable price and cut the barrel down to a legal federal limit and load that bad boy up with #4 duck loads and you have a kickass weapon.


Duck loads...go with deer slugs.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Nov 1, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Just about any firearm will work for self-defense.  If you are concerned about "knock down" or "stopping" power, .380 ACP is pretty weak, but I don't think an assailant will keep attacking if he/she/it gets shot by a .380.  It will be good enough.  Hell 22LR would be good enough, most likely.

I keep my 9mm loaded with range rounds because they are cheap and reliable.  I know they are not as good as defense rounds, but again, I doubt an attacker will keep attacking after I plunk his/her/its bitch ass, so it's good enough for me.


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Nov 1, 2021)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> Just about any firearm will work for self-defense.  If you are concerned about "knock down" or "stopping" power, .380 ACP is pretty weak, but I don't think an assailant will keep attacking if he/she/it gets shot by a .380.  It will be good enough.  Hell 22LR would be good enough, most likely.
> 
> I keep my 9mm loaded with range rounds because they are cheap and reliable.  I know they are not as good as defense rounds, but again, I doubt an attacker will keep attacking after I plunk his/her/its bitch ass, so it's good enough for me.



The study into the video says the .380 acp is good as the 9mm far as stopping power goes.


----------



## marvin martian (Nov 1, 2021)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> Just about any firearm will work for self-defense.  If you are concerned about "knock down" or "stopping" power, .380 ACP is pretty weak, but I don't think an assailant will keep attacking if he/she/it gets shot by a .380.  It will be good enough.  Hell 22LR would be good enough, most likely.
> 
> I keep my 9mm loaded with range rounds because they are cheap and reliable.  I know they are not as good as defense rounds, but again, I doubt an attacker will keep attacking after I plunk his/her/its bitch ass, so it's good enough for me.



I never got into the whole defensive ammo argument. I keep a 12 gauge loaded with 00 buckshot as my home defense weapon. I have confidence it will be plenty to stop any attack.


----------



## Tax Man (Nov 1, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Try your fist as it is attached and needs not ammo. It works for me.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 1, 2021)

Tax Man said:


> Try your fist as it is attached and needs not ammo. It works for me.



When two or three healthy young men, possibly armed, invade your house in the middle of the night, let me know how your fists work out for you.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 1, 2021)

Tax Man said:


> Try your fist as it is attached and needs not ammo. It works for me.


Oh look.  An internet tough guy.


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Nov 3, 2021)

Now I'm hearing that the smaller handguns aren't as reliable as the full sized handguns.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 3, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Now I'm hearing that the smaller handguns aren't as reliable as the full sized handguns.


That’s nonsense.

My Beretta Cheetah 85 BB has been 100 percent reliable.


----------



## whitehall (Nov 7, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Thats my wife's gun but she has it in an 870 Wingmaster.
> Her dad cut it to 18 and 1/8 and put the bead back on and gave it to her when she moved to Houston from the major metropolis of Bedias Texas with an astounding population of 443 people.


You don't need a bead on a 19 inch barrel but it shows how much the guy cared about his daughter's welfare.


----------



## whitehall (Nov 7, 2021)

TeeDub said:


> Duck loads...go with deer slugs.


A deer slug is about 3/4 of an inch out of the muzzle and that's as big as it will ever be. #4 will expand out of an 18 inch barrel to about a 2 ft radius and every BB sized pellet will pack a punch.


----------



## FRIKSHUN (Nov 7, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


45 Mag Remington, that'll do the job!  Seriously


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 7, 2021)

I love the chat about calibers, stopping power, acurracy ect ect.

But the gun you are most familiar with is the one you will likely shoot best under pressure.   That is the gun you grab when you hear something go bump in the night.

The perfect caliber is great (if it exists).    But be sure you hit what you aim at is the key.


----------



## FRIKSHUN (Nov 7, 2021)

TeeDub said:


> Duck loads...go with deer slugs.


AK 47  Haaaa


----------



## whitehall (Nov 8, 2021)

An encounter with a potential car jacker should be dealt with as quickly as possible and almost any caliber handgun would do the job. You can quibble about the difference between 380 and .38 and .357 but a shot in the head or center mass with any one of these weapons should stop the attack. The key is carrying a weapon that is comfortable and you are familiar with. If you are forced to engage a home invader or a burglar it's a different story. It's best best to do it with shock and awe and a shotgun does it best. A single barrel shotgun is cheap and most people aren't aware that you can cut the barrel with a hacksaw and it will still shoot. It will be relatively worthless as a collector's piece or a hunting weapon but it will be priceless when things go bump in the night. Just make sure you check the federal guidelines concerning the barrel length and the overall length of the firearm.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 8, 2021)

The best gun is the one you feel comfortable with and can hit what you are aiming at.  

You can go to gun ranges and pay to try many versions and find the one that is best for you.  

Now at close range and you can't shoot for shit.  SHOTGUN 00 buckshot.  Hard to miss.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 8, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Best thing I know for home defense is a 12 gauge with a light so you just point and shoot. Put the light where you want it to go. I'd use birdshot....#4 or #7. The main thing is stopping power without too much penetration.


Sure, and wearing hearing aids the rest of your life.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Sure, and wearing hearing aids the rest of your life.


Yeah....I should use something quieter....by the way....have you ever fired a gun indoors?
I have on numerous occasions. 
Any gun is going to be loud unless you have a silencer.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 8, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Sure, and wearing hearing aids the rest of your life.


The guy just shot breaking into my house can't hear anymore.  That's a shame.  OH SHIT .............drywall repair........Dry wall sucks.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Now I'm hearing that the smaller handguns aren't as reliable as the full sized handguns.


They are in close quarters. 
Just aim for the head.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 8, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> The best gun is the one you feel comfortable with and can hit what you are aiming at.
> 
> You can go to gun ranges and pay to try many versions and find the one that is best for you.
> 
> Now at close range and you can't shoot for shit.  SHOTGUN 00 buckshot.  Hard to miss.



My two cents.
Very few but the hunter who shoots frequently or a trained cop are going to be comfortable shooting a 12 gauge well enough,  and rarely inside, even at gun ranges. They are too loud and way too much kick for the average person to think about using for self defense when shooting frequently is important for reacting in stressful situations. I especially don’t like the single action trigger of most shotguns either when  such  a devastating weapon Used inside.

You need your wits about you and the last thing you need is any doubt about your firearm. Use the firearm you are comfortable handling and shooting the most. For simplicity, the 9 mm, and .380 and maybe no brainer snobby .38 which has its own recoil issues.
IMO, the ideal house gun is a mid size . 38 revolver which literally, everyone in the house who can hold can learn to load can also  shoot on double action more safely then anyother firearm made. Even a .22 could be a better choice if that’s what you’re most comfortable with. Inside most homes, over penetration is an issue with every firearm so the key is safe handling to begin with..

I like DAO autos too, but racking the slide may not be suitable for everyone.
If one is determined to use a shot gun, I’d start  at 20 gauge and work down.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 8, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> The guy just shot breaking into my house can't hear anymore.  That's a shame.  OH SHIT .............drywall repair........Dry wall sucks.


Hope you were kidding…Oh, who cares about crooks, I’m concerned about the hearing of the shooter and family members. You actually thought I was concerned about a criminal in the act…let’s be real.


----------



## whitehall (Nov 8, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> The best gun is the one you feel comfortable with and can hit what you are aiming at.
> 
> You can go to gun ranges and pay to try many versions and find the one that is best for you.
> 
> Now at close range and you can't shoot for shit.  SHOTGUN 00 buckshot.  Hard to miss.


Anybody who qualifies for a carry permit probably has spent some time on the range but we are talking about defense in mostly a confined space and almost nobody aims when confronted in a deadly situation. We are going back to the difference between a home confrontation and a concealed weapon confrontation. In the case of a concealed weapon incident the question is whether you can get to the firearm and fire it before you are assaulted and killed. A nice little 380 auto seems ideal for concealed carry but the confusion about a round in the chamber and engaging the safety in a confrontational situation can mean the crucial seconds between life and death. For my money a .38 revolver loaded with six or five in a concealed carry defense situation is your best bet. Point and pull the trigger. A (legal) sawed off 12 ga loaded with #4 goose loads is your best bet for shock and awe in a home invasion situation


----------



## Markle (Nov 8, 2021)




----------



## Dagosa (Nov 8, 2021)

whitehall said:


> Anybody who qualifies for a carry permit probably has spent some time on the range but we are talking about defense in mostly a confined space. Almost nobody aims when confronted in a deadly situation. The issue is whether they can get to their firearm and fire it before they are assaulted and killed. A nice little 380 auto seems ideal but the confusion about a round in the chamber and engaging the safety in a confrontational situation can mean the crucial seconds between life and death. For my money a .38 revolver loaded with six or five in a defense situation is your best bet. Point and pull the trigger.


Exactly….
that’s a good reason to have more then one. 😜


----------



## Markle (Nov 8, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> LOL....you use your dog,and I'll shoot it.


Maybe, but most shooters, attempting to hit a trained attack dog, lose their concentration when they are hit by what amounts to a freight train that is all jaws and teeth.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 8, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Yeah....I should use something quieter....by the way....have you ever fired a gun indoors?
> I have on numerous occasions.
> Any gun is going to be loud unless you have a silencer.


Ah, yes. Our department trained frequently inside. Everyone thinks from the time they pull a trigger on. This isn’t ,target shooting. Your first responsibility is to not injure  or kill a family member either during a break in or more realistically when you react to a perceived threat when no one  is there. You live alone, I don’t give a sht what anyone does.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Ah, yes. Our department trained frequently inside. Everyone thinks from the time they pull a trigger on. This isn’t ,target shooting. Your first responsibility is to not injure  or kill a family member either during a break in or more realistically when you react to a perceived threat when no one  is there. You live alone, I don’t give a sht what anyone does.


My team used to train cops in Urban Warfare when I was on an "A" Team at 5th Group.....so I pretty much know all about that. For one thing you have to figure out where you can shoot and where you can't shoot before hand. Which walls are redzones or danger areas taking into consideration family members. 

But the reason I mentioned a shotgun was because it has less penetration especially if you're using birdshot. Chances of it going all the way thru a perp are greatly decreased. You just want to knock the perp on his ass and render them less of a threat. Not to mention the fact that we use shotguns to do door openings in a hurry rather then using a shape charge or explosive.

You also never pull the trigger unless you have positive I.D. on the target. You can't just think it's the perp...you have to know it's the perp. 

But the top reason for a shotgun is you're probably going to be just waking up and not able to see as well as when you're wide awake....so pinpoint accuracy isn't necessary. Point it and shoot.


----------



## westwall (Nov 8, 2021)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Crook close up..shotgun..crook more that 30ft..rifle--handguns are for personal protection..closer the better..but..many's the gun fight that has had dozens of rounds fired..and no hits. A well trained dog is just as good, if not better, for home protection...IMO.





Well trained dogs cost 5 times what a gun costs.


----------



## westwall (Nov 8, 2021)

HenryBHough said:


> The 14-gauge with sabot rounds has proven efficient.  Not at all heavy; Moderate kick though the barrel being cut to 18-1/8 inch might be somewhat to blame on that account.  Works good on bears, too.





No such thing as a 14 gauge in general use.  10, 12, 16, 20, 28, and .410 are the ones in use here in the USA.


----------



## westwall (Nov 8, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?





The answer is what you have in your hand, when you need it.  Be proficient in whatever you use.  That is rule one.


----------



## WelfareQueen (Nov 8, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Best thing I know for home defense is a 12 gauge with a light so you just point and shoot. Put the light where you want it to go. I'd use birdshot....#4 or #7. The main thing is stopping power without too much penetration.




I have a pump action Mossburg 12 gauge that holds 6 rounds.  It is cut off a 1/4 inch over the legal limit.   I use a mix of slugs and buckshot.  That would stop Godzilla.  Also have a Smith and Wesson .41 Mag in the nightstand.  That would merely stop a Grizzly Bear.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2021)

whitehall said:


> Anybody who qualifies for a carry permit probably has spent some time on the range but we are talking about defense in mostly a confined space and almost nobody aims when confronted in a deadly situation. We are going back to the difference between a home confrontation and a concealed weapon confrontation. In the case of a concealed weapon incident the question is whether you can get to the firearm and fire it before you are assaulted and killed. A nice little 380 auto seems ideal for concealed carry but the confusion about a round in the chamber and engaging the safety in a confrontational situation can mean the crucial seconds between life and death. For my money a .38 revolver loaded with six or five in a concealed carry defense situation is your best bet. Point and pull the trigger. A (legal) sawed off 12 ga loaded with #4 goose loads is your best bet for shock and awe in a home invasion situation


You can't expect to be a pro with any gun if you don't at the very least familiarize yourself with the weapon before actually firing the thing. Learn how to work it like second nature and develop muscle-memory before you load it and put it into full operation. Range time is important.....but it's getting more and more difficult to get ammo for some guns. Trap door 45-70s are tough to get and so are 45Long Colt....not Cowboy Loads....everyone has those. My brother does his own loading....and he's a retired US Marshal but he can't get primers anymore.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 8, 2021)

WelfareQueen said:


> I have a pump action Mossburg 12 gauge that holds 6 rounds.  I use a mix of slugs and buckshot.  That would stop Godzilla.  Also have a Smith and Wesson .41 Mag in the nightstand.  That would merely stop a Grizzly Bear.


I've got a Mossburg 590 12 gauge....mine holds 7 rds. I wouldn't use slugs in the house.


----------



## westwall (Nov 8, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> I've got a Mossburg 590 12 gauge....mine holds 7 rds. I wouldn't use slugs in the house.




I have a Benelli M1 Super 90 and indoors I use high base #6 shot.  It will remove whatever it hits at short range, and dies in a wall.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 9, 2021)

If I hear a noise in the house late at night, I get the .357 revolver out of my nightstand.    It is a solid old Ruger Security Six.  My girlfriend has a S&W snubnosed revolver in her nightstand in .357 as well.    Both are loaded with the first round being .38 Special ratshot, followed by 5 rounds of 158 grain Mag-Safe.

We have talked over and over about what we will do and where we will go.  If we wake up in time to grab the dog before he goes after whomever is in the house, we'll be fine.  Anyone hurts the dog and it will be a slow, torturous death for them.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> If I hear a noise in the house late at night, I get the .357 revolver out of my nightstand.    It is a solid old Ruger Security Six.  My girlfriend has a S&W snubnosed revolver in her nightstand in .357 as well.    Both are loaded with the first round being .38 Special ratshot, followed by 5 rounds of 158 grain Mag-Safe.
> 
> We have talked over and over about what we will do and where we will go.  If we wake up in time to grab the dog before he goes after whomever is in the house, we'll be fine.  Anyone hurts the dog and it will be a slow, torturous death for them.


I have a dog that scares my vet to death. I never trained him to be that way....he just hates her because she cut his nuts off and he has a long memory. I pity the fool that breaks into my house.
My wife is suffering from Dementia so working out a plan with her is useless. 

I don't think anyone is going to try to break in to my house. My primary concern is Poopy-Pants and his AG trying to take me down with his corrupt FBI.....even though I don't break the law. It's sad when you live in a formerly free country and your worst worry is your government turning against you.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> My two cents.
> Very few but the hunter who shoots frequently or a trained cop are going to be comfortable shooting a 12 gauge well enough,  and rarely inside, even at gun ranges. They are too loud and way too much kick for the average person to think about using for self defense when shooting frequently is important for reacting in stressful situations. I especially don’t like the single action trigger of most shotguns either when  such  a devastating weapon Used inside.
> 
> You need your wits about you and the last thing you need is any doubt about your firearm. Use the firearm you are comfortable handling and shooting the most. For simplicity, the 9 mm, and .380 and maybe no brainer snobby .38 which has its own recoil issues.
> ...


Course you don't want to use buckshot....because they put a larger charge in them than in #9 birdshot. 
Pull the trigger and you'll discover the difference....immediately. 
#9 isn't is that bad. 
I fired a 20 gauge when I was 12.....haven't fired one since.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

Markle said:


> Maybe, but most shooters, attempting to hit a trained attack dog, lose their concentration when they are hit by what amounts to a freight train that is all jaws and teeth.



  It would be pretty hard to miss with the barrel jammed into his ribs.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> If I hear a noise in the house late at night, I get the .357 revolver out of my nightstand.    It is a solid old Ruger Security Six.  My girlfriend has a S&W snubnosed revolver in her nightstand in .357 as well.    Both are loaded with the first round being .38 Special ratshot, followed by 5 rounds of 158 grain Mag-Safe.
> 
> We have talked over and over about what we will do and where we will go.  If we wake up in time to grab the dog before he goes after whomever is in the house, we'll be fine.  Anyone hurts the dog and it will be a slow, torturous death for them.



   I dont know about having rat shot as your first round.
You may not get an easy shot after the first one so I'd want it to be lethal.


----------



## whitehall (Nov 9, 2021)

Markle said:


>


----------



## whitehall (Nov 9, 2021)

I guess you have to register it as a handgun in most jurisdictions. It probably packs a punch alright but it looks like a space toy. A drugged out home invader might laugh until you were forced to kill him.


----------



## DrLove (Nov 9, 2021)

If my 9mm G17 loaded with defensive rounds won't stop a home intruder, nothing will.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 9, 2021)

DrLove said:


> If my 9mm G17 loaded with defensive rounds won't stop a home intruder, nothing will.


You're 6'5" and work out 4-5 times a week - why do you need a gun?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> My two cents.
> Very few but the hunter who shoots frequently or a trained cop are going to be comfortable shooting a 12 gauge well enough,  and rarely inside, even at gun ranges. They are too loud and way too much kick for the average person to think about using for self defense when shooting frequently is important for reacting in stressful situations. I especially don’t like the single action trigger of most shotguns either when  such  a devastating weapon Used inside.
> 
> You need your wits about you and the last thing you need is any doubt about your firearm. Use the firearm you are comfortable handling and shooting the most. For simplicity, the 9 mm, and .380 and maybe no brainer snobby .38 which has its own recoil issues.
> ...



    Meh...My Wife uses a 12 gauge and has no problem with the recoil.
If you're in a stressful situation you wont even notice the recoil.
It's like shooting a deer with a high powered rifle,you dont notice the recoil.
   I hate sighting in my .270 or 30.06 thats when you notice the recoil.


----------



## DrLove (Nov 9, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> You're 6'5" and work out 4-5 times a week - why do you need a gun?


Won't do much good against a home invasion by 3-4 guys or even a single armed intruder. 
Nope, that's when I reach for Precious.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 9, 2021)

I go .380.
I prefer not to kill if possible.

But the Glock shotgun is weird.





{..
Drawing inspiration from Glock’s styling, the DX-12 snubnose double-barrel shotgun concept from HARDWAR3 Industries is an interesting take on the shotty category. Just looking at it informs why creator Ivan Santic dubbed it “The Punisher.”
The DX-12 is a wild concept that seems well thought out from the 3D mock up on his page. The futuristic DX-12 looks more like an upgrade for _Call of Duty_ or something The Terminator might use to blow away baddies than anything you might buy in a gun shop, but the lethally cool styling is impressive nonetheless.
The laws of physics might be the biggest drawback to the DX-12. The short, pistol-style barrel found here, coupled with 12-gauge shells would have some serious recoil that would need to be addressed if this ever saw a production run. 

Until then, Glock should sit up and take notice of Santic’s design if they ever decide to pursue a shotgun/pistol hybrid. 
...}


----------



## Peace (Nov 9, 2021)

Otis Mayfield 

Shotgun will stop anyone and I know for a fact it is the best because of spread and sound!


----------



## westwall (Nov 9, 2021)

DrLove said:


> Won't do much good against a home invasion by 3-4 guys or even a single armed intruder.
> Nope, that's when I reach for Precious.






In a multiple bad guy situation the AR-15 is the best you can have.


----------



## Am3rikan-Warri0r (Nov 9, 2021)

Haha All of the above work to stop a crook. But, depending on what they're trying to steal I may have to hit them with the big boys rather than my hand cannon!


----------



## meaner gene (Nov 9, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Meh...My Wife uses a 12 gauge and has no problem with the recoil.
> If you're in a stressful situation you wont even notice the recoil.
> It's like shooting a deer with a high powered rifle,you dont notice the recoil.
> I hate sighting in my .270 or 30.06 thats when you notice the recoil.


For home defense you;re stopping a man not a mountain.  And the amount of stopping power shouldn't be enough to go through every wall in the house.  And the number one rule is a gun is useless if you don't know how to shoot it.


----------



## DrLove (Nov 9, 2021)

westwall said:


> In a multiple bad guy situation the AR-15 is the best you can have.



Sure Sure - My old neighbor in Boise has three ARs. I'm like WTF dude, why would you need that kind of firepower?
He thought about that for a minute and came up with the perfect answer:
Zombie Apocalypse!


----------



## westwall (Nov 9, 2021)

DrLove said:


> Sure Sure - My old neighbor in Boise had three ARs. I'm like WTF dude, why would you need that kind of firepower?
> He thought about that for a minute and came up with the perfect answer:
> Zombie Apocalypse!
> 
> View attachment 562241






Pregnant Florida woman uses AR-15 to fatally shoot armed intruder​Two armed men broke into the house and pistol whipped husband, before wife pulled out their legally possessed weapon and opened fire.








						Pregnant Florida woman uses AR-15 to fatally shoot armed intruder
					

Two armed men broke into the house and pistol whipped husband, before wife pulled out their legally possessed weapon and opened fire.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## iamwhatiseem (Nov 9, 2021)

A shotgun is the best home defense there is hands down.
Unless you are being attacked by multiple people, all carrying guns, a shot gun beats an assault rifle easily.
 A semi auto security shotgun (typically shorter stock and barrel) is outstanding. As long as you are pointing in the direction of the assailant - you are good.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

meaner gene said:


> For home defense you;re stopping a man not a mountain.  And the amount of stopping power shouldn't be enough to go through every wall in the house.  And the number one rule is a gun is useless if you don't know how to shoot it.



  Have you seen the videos of a man being shot dozens of times with a 9mm and he still doesn't go down?
And I know how to shoot my guns or anyone else's for that matter.
    As far as rounds going through walls and causing collateral damage thats on the shooter. He or she should know whats behind their target.
Personally I know whats behind my target anywhere in my house. 
   The house is all brick and I know where my windows are.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 9, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Yeah....I should use something quieter....by the way....have you ever fired a gun indoors?
> I have on numerous occasions.
> Any gun is going to be loud unless you have a silencer.


Of course. Try a minimum of 140 db. Now start going up from there for a 12 gauge.
140 db is instant hearing damage. the decision  to shoot a firearm in a house is more then just thinking an intruder is breaking a window. 



HereWeGoAgain said:


> Meh...My Wife uses a 12 gauge and has no problem with the recoil.
> If you're in a stressful situation you wont even notice the recoil.
> It's like shooting a deer with a high powered rifle,you dont notice the recoil.
> I hate sighting in my .270 or 30.06 thats when you notice the recoil.


That’s fine. The day she practices with any regularity inside with a shot gun, let me know. Imo, more controllable firearms should be considered first. If all we‘re going o do is decide which gun can kill the most people the easiest, let’s mine the the entrance mat.


----------



## TeeDub (Nov 9, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Yeah....I should use something quieter....by the way....have you ever fired a gun indoors?
> I have on numerous occasions.
> Any gun is going to be loud unless you have a silencer.


Suppressor, silencers are not legal.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Of course. Try a minimum of 140 db. Now start going up from there for a 12 gauge.
> 140 db is instant hearing damage. the decision  to shoot a firearm in a house is more then just thinking an intruder is breaking a window.
> 
> 
> That’s fine. The day she practices with any regularity inside with a shot gun, let me know. Imo, more controllable firearms should be considered first. If all we‘re going o do is decide which gun can kill the most people the easiest, let’s mine the the entrance mat.



  She can shoot a beer can in the air from the hip.
As far as decibels go inside thats the least of your worries if someone is invading your home.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 9, 2021)

TeeDub said:


> Suppressor, silencers are not legal.


Whoever told you that, lied.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 9, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> She can shoot a beer can in the air from the hip.
> As far as decibels go inside thats the least of your worries if someone is invading your home.


Sorry, this isn’t a beer can and doubt anyone tries it in a home where background is the single most important consideration when you shoot a weapon with the spread if a shotgun. If you can’t hit body mass with a handgun in the confines of a home, maybe, you shouldn’t be even handling a firearm.


The  old, “decibels being the least of your worries is pretty inaccurate”. Once you fire that first shot without protection, it’s going to be a while before anyone can communicate with any firearm and worse with a shotgun. Not an advantage in this situation. This isn’t a Dirty Harry movie. Before you use a shotgun inside a home, you have more, not fewer areas of concern…..that’s my point.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> Whoever told you that, lied.



  He's just another stupid liberal.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Sorry, this isn’t a beer can and doubt anyone tries it in a home where background is the single most important consideration when you shoot a weapon with the spread if a shotgun. If you can’t hit body mass with a handgun in the confines of a home, maybe, you shouldn’t be even handling a firearm.
> 
> 
> The  old, “decibels being the least of your worries is pretty inaccurate”. Once you fire that first shot without protection, it’s going to be a while before anyone can communicate with any firearm and wise with a shit gun. Not an advantage in this situation. This isn’t a Dirty Harry movie. Before you use a shotgun inside a home, you have more, not fewer areas of concern…..that’s my point.



  So tell me,how much spread do you think an 18 inch 12 gauge has.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 9, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> So tell me,how much spread do you think an 18 inch 12 gauge has.


Oh, we’re not playing twenty questions.
Not much, depending upon the load and there are too many variables to play that game.
But the wrongful general consensus I read in posts is, a shot gun can be a substitute for inaccuracy. My contention is even if your aim off the slightest there is a greater chance of hitting something unintended . 

That and home has no place for a  longer  barrel weapon. Your committed to shoot more then not with a weapon you can’t control as well at close distances. You can make up how a home invasion will occur all you want. The options for all of them just aren’t there with a shotgun over a handgun.  Personally. You use what you have. But being realistic is much better then pretending you know ahead of time what will go down.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Not much, depending upon the load. But the wrongful general consensus I read in posts is, a shot gun can be a substitute for inaccuracy. My contention is even if your aim off the slightest there is a greater chance of hitting something unintended . That and home has no place for a  longer  barrel weapon. Your committed to shoot more then not with a weapon you can’t control as well at close distances. You can make up how a home invasion will occur all you want. The options for all of them just aren’t there with a shotgun over a handgun.  Personally. You use what you have. But being realistic is much better then pretending you know ahead of time what will go down.



  meh...I've been through an attempted home invasion.
And yes i used a shotgun to deter their attempt. But any gun would have been sufficient.
   Patterns are not that different between an 18 inch barrel and a 28 inch barrel when you're talking 20 foot.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

TeeDub said:


> Suppressor, silencers are not legal.


Depends on where you live. 








						Silencer Central - Silence Made Simple
					

At Silencer Central, we make buying a silencer simple and handle the paperwork for you. Shop online and get started today!




					www.silencercentral.com


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Of course. Try a minimum of 140 db. Now start going up from there for a 12 gauge.
> 140 db is instant hearing damage. the decision  to shoot a firearm in a house is more then just thinking an intruder is breaking a window.
> 
> 
> That’s fine. The day she practices with any regularity inside with a shot gun, let me know. Imo, more controllable firearms should be considered first. If all we‘re going o do is decide which gun can kill the most people the easiest, let’s mine the the entrance mat.


I never fired a weapon without hearing protection, if I could help it.
But any effective gun will cause hearing loss indoors.....and some hearing loss outdoors.
I had a firecracker blow up next to my right ear when I was a kid and I have a slight bit of hearing loss because of it.

One of they guys in my shop at Ft Campbell was 49 and needed hearing aids because of that. Firing in a tree stand or poaching from inside his truck without hearing protection.
Firing indoors is loud....which is what a flash-bang is supposed to be used for....to disorient your attacker. The louder....the better. The loud noise will literally cause them to lose balance even if you miss. I guess this is the difference between home defense and urban combat.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Sorry, this isn’t a beer can and doubt anyone tries it in a home where background is the single most important consideration when you shoot a weapon with the spread if a shotgun. If you can’t hit body mass with a handgun in the confines of a home, maybe, you shouldn’t be even handling a firearm.
> 
> 
> The  old, “decibels being the least of your worries is pretty inaccurate”. Once you fire that first shot without protection, it’s going to be a while before anyone can communicate with any firearm and worse with a shotgun. Not an advantage in this situation. This isn’t a Dirty Harry movie. Before you use a shotgun inside a home, you have more, not fewer areas of concern…..that’s my point.


It depends on your skill level and your prep work. 
Fire a shotgun in the dark with a flashlight and you'll know you hit the target.
Using a pistol at close range...you have to worry about hitting pets and family members. 
I even learned how to shoot a shotgun in a hostage situation and not hit the hostage. 
My instructor at SOT was an athlete in the Olympics with a shotgun.
He could make a smiley face with slugs from 30 yds.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Oh, we’re not playing twenty questions.
> Not much, depending upon the load and there are too many variables to play that game.
> But the wrongful general consensus I read in posts is, a shot gun can be a substitute for inaccuracy. My contention is even if your aim off the slightest there is a greater chance of hitting something unintended .
> 
> That and home has no place for a  longer  barrel weapon. Your committed to shoot more then not with a weapon you can’t control as well at close distances. You can make up how a home invasion will occur all you want. The options for all of them just aren’t there with a shotgun over a handgun.  Personally. You use what you have. But being realistic is much better then pretending you know ahead of time what will go down.


Not true.
The bedroom is a perfect place for a shotgun.
You don't go looking for the perp....you wait behind the bed and when he enters the fatal-funnel (the door) he's toast. The door frame makes a beautiful silhouette target.
And I've done plenty of room clearings with an M16 which is almost the same length as a pump action 12 gauge.
Course the Army went to the M4 which is a cut down version of the M16A2.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 9, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> I never fired a weapon without hearing protection, if I could help it.
> But any effective gun will cause hearing loss indoors.....and some hearing loss outdoors.
> I had a firecracker blow up next to my right ear when I was a kid and I have a slight bit of hear loss because of it.
> 
> ...



  In my younger years I never wore ear protection.
As i got older I found I didnt have any choice,after a thirty round mag of 5.56 it felt like my ears were bleeding.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> In my younger years I never wore ear protection.
> As i got older I found I didnt have any choice,after a thirty round mag of 5.56 it felt like my ears were bleeding.


Yep. You want to be like Rambo....but Rambo was a unrealistic. 
You need to wear hearing protection. 
And the nice thing is I have electronic earmuffs that can hear voices but cancels loud noises.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> You're 6'5" and work out 4-5 times a week - why do you need a gun?


Probably because he's not Bruce Lee.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> I go .380.
> I prefer not to kill if possible.
> 
> But the Glock shotgun is weird.
> ...


Looks like it would break your wrist.


----------



## Rawley (Nov 9, 2021)

HenryBHough said:


> The 14-gauge with sabot rounds has proven efficient.  Not at all heavy; Moderate kick though the barrel being cut to 18-1/8 inch might be somewhat to blame on that account.  Works good on bears, too.


14 gauge? Where do you live?


----------



## westwall (Nov 9, 2021)

TeeDub said:


> Suppressor, silencers are not legal.





They are ALL suppressors.  Silencer is an inaccurate term.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

westwall said:


> They are ALL suppressors.  Silencer is an inaccurate term.


Yeah....but that's the name they gave them. 
Nothing is silenced.....it's still a fairly loud pop.
But I like them because it greatly reduces the recoil. 
It makes you more accurate. 
It's like shooting a BeeBee Gun.

You know...if you target practice with a pistol for a long time you'll discover just how much more accurate you are with a rifle. 
It's amazing.


----------



## westwall (Nov 9, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Yeah....but that's the name they gave them.
> Nothing is silenced.....it's still a fairly loud pop.
> But I like them because it greatly reduces the recoil.
> It makes you more accurate.
> ...






Yes, I have several Yankee Hill suppressors.  There are some that are SUPER quiet though.  I have a Reed Knight SEAL hush puppy, and it is so quiet the bullet hitting the target makes more noise.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 9, 2021)

westwall said:


> Yes, I have several Yankee Hill suppressors.  There are some that are SUPER quiet though.  I have a Reed Knight SEAL hush puppy, and it is so quiet the bullet hitting the target makes more noise.


Mine is an Ultima 9mm for my Springfield Armory pistol thru Silencer Central.
I ordered it in March and they still haven't shipped it yet. 
Waiting on approval from the FBI.


----------



## whitehall (Nov 10, 2021)

Cheap and effective. You can buy (and register) a high tech Glock space gun for close to a grand or you can pick up a single shot 12 ga. and buy some cheap duck loads and cut the barrel (and maybe the stock) to legal federal guidelines and you have a $100 dollar weapon that will turn the heads of any home invader.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Nov 10, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> The study into the video says the .380 acp is good as the 9mm far as stopping power goes.


That depends.  .380 might not be as lethal if the crook is wearing a heavy coat.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Nov 10, 2021)

westwall said:


> Well trained dogs cost 5 times what a gun costs.


They sure are fun, though...lol


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Nov 10, 2021)

DrLove said:


> Sure Sure - My old neighbor in Boise has three ARs. I'm like WTF dude, why would you need that kind of firepower?
> He thought about that for a minute and came up with the perfect answer:
> Zombie Apocalypse!
> 
> View attachment 562241


Because one day, you might need one and he'll have extras.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 10, 2021)

Justifiable homicide is very rare.  Here.


RIP all homicide victims and suicide offenders who died by any caliber.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 10, 2021)

Markle said:


> Maybe, but most shooters, attempting to hit a trained attack dog, lose their concentration when they are hit by what amounts to a freight train that is all jaws and teeth.



Except the dog is running directly towards you.   The line of sight only changes a very small amount as he comes.   

Plus, at point blank range, most guns have a muzzle flash that amounts to fire on the fur, even if the bullet misses.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 10, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I dont know about having rat shot as your first round.
> You may not get an easy shot after the first one so I'd want it to be lethal.



If the first shot is easy, then the rest will be easier as they are slowed by the pain.   My second shot will only be delayed the amount of time it takes to pull the trigger again.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 10, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> If the first shot is easy, then the rest will be easier as they are slowed by the pain.   My second shot will only be delayed the amount of time it takes to pull the trigger again.



   The way I see it is you're giving your target a chance to take cover after getting peppered with rat shot,which is by no means lethal.
I'd prefer to hit em with a lethal shot right off the bat.
   Of course thats just me.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 10, 2021)

whitehall said:


> Cheap and effective. You can buy (and register) a high tech Glock space gun for close to a grand or you can pick up a single shot 12 ga. and buy some cheap duck loads and cut the barrel (and maybe the stock) to legal federal guidelines and you have a $100 dollar weapon that will turn the heads of any home invader.


Seriously,  if home invasions are normal  where you live, I’d move or get a couple of very big dogs . Both are much more effective. Why plan on something that never happens with a weapon you never practice with. . Just use what you carry.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 10, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> The way I see it is you're giving your target a chance to take cover after getting peppered with rat shot,which is by no means lethal.
> I'd prefer to hit em with a lethal shot right off the bat.
> Of course thats just me.



I figure the first shot is when you are the most jittery.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 10, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Seriously,  if home invasions are normal  where you live, I’d move or get a couple of very big dogs . Both are much more effective. Why plan on something that never happens with a weapon you never practice with. . Just use what you carry.



  The Wife and I experienced an attempted home invasion.
Fortunately I had the 870 shorty on hand at the front door.
   I've never seen 4 mexicans move so fast!!
   They jumped into their supposedly broken down vehicle and hauled ass...with the hood still open.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 10, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> I figure the first shot is when you are the most jittery.



    I dont see it that way.
 Your first shot is going to be your most accurate since you've caught them unaware.
Once the bullets start flying your target is going to be much harder to hit.


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 10, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I dont see it that way.
> Your first shot is going to be your most accurate since you've caught them unaware.
> Once the bullets start flying your target is going to be much harder to hit.



If someone comes in, I'll let you know how it turns out.   A .38 Special shotshell is not as weak as you think.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 10, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> If someone comes in, I'll let you know how it turns out.   A .38 Special shotshell is not as weak as you think.



  I have em for my .45 and they really dont do much damage to a watermelon.
Just a bunch of small holes.
     If you were to hit em in the face and took out the eyes yeah but how likely is that?


----------



## westwall (Nov 10, 2021)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> They sure are fun, though...lol


Yup.  I have a 15 month old german shepard.  She's fun as hell!


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 10, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> The Wife and I experienced an attempted home invasion.
> Fortunately I had the 870 shorty on hand at the front door.
> I've never seen 4 mexicans move so fast!!
> They jumped into their supposedly broken down vehicle and hauled ass...with the hood still open.


So you live in Mexico ? Might be time  to move Or get an Akita


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 10, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> So you live in Mexico ?



  Close,Texas.
Cant wait till the southern invasion starts affecting states that arent on the border.
   You'll learn real quick.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 10, 2021)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Close,Texas.
> Cant wait till the southern invasion starts affecting states that arent on the border.
> You'll learn real quick.


Maybe they just wanted to do your roof for nothing while you slept.😘
I’m not worried about a Mexican invasion. For one thing, the black flies and ticks in the woods during the summer and 200 inches of snow in the winter is such a big commitment to get through, everyone here leaves the keys in their car and their  dog kennel door open. Oh, we all have shot guns too. We just never get to use them on home invaders. We all moved here for that reason. .


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 10, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> If someone comes in, I'll let you know how it turns out.   A .38 Special shotshell is not as weak as you think.


I’ve thought about that too. Maybe the first two rounds  shotshell followed by three full  wad cutters.


----------



## westwall (Nov 10, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> So you live in Mexico ? Might be time  to move Or get an Akita




Akita's ain't bulletproof.


----------



## Markle (Nov 11, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Seriously,  if home invasions are normal  where you live, I’d move or get a couple of very big dogs . Both are much more effective. Why plan on something that never happens with a weapon you never practice with. . Just use what you carry.


According to police records, the vast majority of home invasions are known drug houses.  The risk/reward odds are better known by the perpetrators.  It does make sense.


----------



## Turtlesoup (Nov 11, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Shotgun---most people can't control their adrenaline so it is harder to miss with a shotgun---


----------



## Markle (Nov 11, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> Justifiable homicide is very rare.  Here.
> 
> 
> RIP all homicide victims and suicide offenders who died by any caliber.








Your friends on the far-left are eagerly taking away our police protection and disheartening those remaining.

What do you expect Americans to do?  Voluntarily become victims or stand up and defend themselves.

Glaringly, in your post, you neglected to detail the number of violent crimes prevented by someone with a gun.  Why?  Do you not believe that it frequently happens?  If a crime is prevented, will it be reported?

If what you infer was true, then why do so many countries, which ban guns to civilians, have so much higher rates of violent crimes?


----------



## WinterBorn (Nov 11, 2021)

Turtlesoup said:


> Shotgun---most people can't control their adrenaline so it is harder to miss with a shotgun---



The spread pattern of a typical shotgun isn't going to help much inside the home.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 11, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Caliber isn't as important as accuracy.

Find a firearm be it rifle pistol or shotgun that you are comfortable shooting then practice.

Personally I prefer a handgun.  I have a shotgun and a couple rifles but if someone breaks into my house I'm going for my 9 mm.  

I'm a dead shot at 30 feet and can fire with either hand.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

Markle said:


> According to police records, the vast majority of home invasions are known drug houses.  The risk/reward odds are better known by the perpetrators.  It does make sense.


So, those who should be most concerned are probably those involved in the drug trade ? Interesting.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Caliber isn't as important as accuracy.
> 
> Find a firearm be it rifle pistol or shotgun that you are comfortable shooting then practice.
> 
> ...


All good advice !


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

Turtlesoup said:


> Shotgun---most people can't control their adrenaline so it is harder to miss with a shotgun---


If that’s the case, they should t be using a shot gun. That reasoning makes it  easier to hit something unintended. Maybe  If you “need a shot gun”, there are other problems worth addressing.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 11, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> Justifiable homicide is very rare.  Here.


You are fully aware of the fact your statement means nothing.
You are just as ware of the fact guns are used for self-defense FAR more often that to commit murder or suicide.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> You are fully aware of the fact your statement means nothing.
> You are just as ware of the fact guns are used for self-defense FAR more often that to commit murder or suicide.


Of course. In the criminal world they’re used all the time.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 11, 2021)

IMHO:
An AR pistol / carbine in 9/10/40/45 is a better choice for home defense than a shotgun or handgun.
In this, there's no reason to not choose 10mm or 45.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Caliber isn't as important as accuracy.
> 
> Find a firearm be it rifle pistol or shotgun that you are comfortable shooting then practice.
> 
> ...


Exactly…..it’s the firearm you have close at hand. No one can predict when and where you will be or what activities you’ll be engaged in. It’s no different then carry if you’re not at home. For some reason, the dilusional idea is, that any one breaking in will announce it and give you time to go get a weapon of choice. It never is. You’re just as restricted in your movements in your home as you maybe out side. 

My bro in law,  a retired b52 pilot had imo, a solid tactic to be prepare…He keeps several small revolvers hidden through out the house so they were more accessible at any time, regardless of where he was. . Funny, my other bro in law, a retired small arms instructor, does exactly the same thing. It’s a weapon that no one  needs special training on to get quickly and easily into action.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Nov 11, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Watching this, you'd think the .380 ACP is best, or at least as good as the rest of the pistols. This would mean that you could get a smaller, lighter pistol with the .380 without losing any effectiveness.
> 
> The 2nd amendment allows us guns. Which gun do you think has the most stopping power? Which is the easiest to carry? Do you believe the study is accurate?


Just have a dance off


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

ESDRAELON said:


> AR-15 is the PERFECT home defense weapon


It maybe perfect on the farm, but in a residential area ?


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 11, 2021)

Captain Caveman said:


> Just have a dance off


I think I could beat the snot out of most criminals  with ease in this one.


----------



## Turtlesoup (Nov 11, 2021)

WinterBorn said:


> The spread pattern of a typical shotgun isn't going to help much inside the home.


It may not help your home-----but it is more likely to atleast wound attackers to chase them off.   But yes, if you keep in mind shoot to kill rule and make damn sure you kill not just wound an attacker (as they can actually sue for medical bills)---then you want to go with something more lethal.  (I think a new rule of hide the body should be a better a choice at this point.)  We got alligators in Florida btw


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 11, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> You are fully aware of the fact your statement means nothing.
> You are just as ware of the fact guns are used for self-defense FAR more often that to commit murder or suicide.


Data on nonlethal self-defense is very inconclusive.  All murders and suicides are documented.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 11, 2021)

Markle said:


> If what you infer was true, then why do so many countries, which ban guns to civilians, have so much higher rates of violent crimes?


UK has lower crime rate then USA.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 11, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> You are fully aware of the fact your statement means nothing.
> You are just as ware of the fact guns are used for self-defense FAR more often that to commit murder or suicide.



Only when the trigger is not pulled.
Firearms prevent over a million violent crimes each year, without any shots being fired.
Rarely is it ever necessary to fire a shot.
Brandishing will prevent any property crime.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 11, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> Only when the trigger is not pulled.
> Firearms prevent over a million violent crimes each year, without any shots being fired.
> Rarely is it ever necessary to fire a shot.
> Brandishing will prevent any property crime.


I find these figures very very dubious.

Also, a million simple assaults is much less then over 10,000 murders and 20,000 suicides.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 11, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> I find these figures very very dubious.
> 
> Also, a million simple assaults is much less then over 10,000 murders and 20,000 suicides.



The DOJ says 1 million defensive uses of a firearm at a minimum.
Many people estimate over 2.5 million, because they are never reported.
The way to get a feel for the scale is that over 1 million violent crimes are successful every year, so likely many more times that are unsuccessful.

And no, the 10,000 murders are mostly due to the War on Drugs, just like Prohibition caused a murder spike.
And suicides are a factor of modern society, with more pressures, longer life span, etc.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 11, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> Data on nonlethal self-defense is very inconclusive.


^^^
This is a lie.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 12, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> Brandishing will prevent any property crime.


That can be a crime in and of itself. People who carry firearms are more, not less, likely to be shot.


Rigby5 said:


> Only when the trigger is not pulled.
> Firearms prevent over a million violent crimes each year, without any shots being fired.
> Rarely is it ever necessary to fire a shot.
> Brandishing will prevent any property crime.











						Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed
					

People who carry firearms are far likelier to get shot – and killed – than unarmed people, finds a new study of hundreds of shooting victims in Philadelphia




					www.newscientist.com


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 12, 2021)

Captain Caveman said:


> Just have a dance off


Just so people know. There is a big connection between martial arts and dancing.
More then a  few instructors teach both.
FYI
“Bruce Lee was a *champion Latin Dancer* and at age 18 became Hong Kong's Cha Cha Champion. That's right, Hong Kong's 1958 Cha Cha Championship winner was none other than a teenage Bruce Lee. Lee studied dancing as astutely as he did Kung Fu.”


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 12, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> UK has lower crime rate then USA.


Not really.









						United Kingdom vs United States: Crime Facts and Stats
					

Total crimes, Crime levels, Murder rate per million people, Intentional homicide rate, Murder rate and 62 More Interesting Facts and Stats



					www.nationmaster.com
				



Crimes per 1000 people

UK  109.96
US   41.29


----------



## Dayton3 (Nov 12, 2021)

Depends on two factors. 

The shooter and the target.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Nov 12, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> UK has lower crime rate then USA.


England's crime rate is steadily rising.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 12, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> UK has lower crime rate then USA.


Why is that?


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 12, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> Why is that?


UK has lower crime rate then USA because they ban guns and have much better Welfare and help for all people in need.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 12, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Not really.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Crime rate is very moot -- different jurisdictions have different laws.

Murder rate in UK is much lower.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 12, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> UK has lower crime rate then USA because they ban guns and have much better Welfare and help for all people in need.


You cannot demonstrate the necessary relationship you claim, above.
And now, you'll prove it.


----------



## DudleySmith (Nov 12, 2021)

The firearm you have the most practice with is the 'best'.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 12, 2021)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Uh-huh..sure..keep thinking that political party or ideological position somehow equates to some sort of innate skill with firearms..dumbass~
> I know dogs that would rip your throat out..while you piss yourself and fire your weapon into the floor. just sayin'--a guy is a lot more frantic..with 120 lbs of dog attached to him.
> All your post goes to show is that being a fool is a non-political affair.
> 
> You don't need squat that shoots 100 yards for home defense. If the perp is fleeing..ya stop shooting..unless you like jail~



  Political ideology has nothing at all to do with it...experience does however.
And no a dog wouldnt rip my throat out I'd simply put up my left forearm and let him take hold while I jammed the pistol in my right hand into his ribs just behind the shoulder and blow his/hers heart out the right side of its body.
     And yes I need something that shoots out to 100 yards and then some.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 13, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> Crime rate is very moot -- different jurisdictions have different laws.
> 
> Murder rate in UK is much lower.


So then why claim the UK has a lower crime rate?

And there are a lot of other violent crimes besides murder.

Our murder rate is skewed by just a handful of ultra violent inner city areas.  These areas are small and well defined.  In fact an area of just a few city blocks can have a murder rate that is 5 or more times higher than the national average and the same size area just half a mile away can have a murder rate of near zero.

We know where all these violent areas are and we choose to do nothing about the violence because it's mostly young minority males killing other young minority males.

And the murder rate in the UK has always been lower than that of the US even before they passed all those draconian gun laws that liberals love so much.

There is a lot more than just gun laws involved


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> UK has lower crime rate then USA.




Wrong...

_*We thought Bier’s points were reasonable, so we tried to replicate his approach. We looked at the raw violent crime numbers for each country, using statistics for England and Wales for 2012 and for the United States for 2011, in a way that sought to compare apples to apples. (We should note that the United Kingdom includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the numbers in the meme appear to be based only on crime in England and Wales, which are calculated separately.)*_

_*For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
*_
*For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people.*









						PolitiFact - Social media post says U.K. has far higher violent crime rate than U.S. does
					

The debate over gun policy has inspired a blizzard of messages on social media, from both supporters and opponents of gu




					www.politifact.com


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> That can be a crime in and of itself. People who carry firearms are more, not less, likely to be shot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...






The people who get shot are the criminals carrying the guns illegally....of the 10,258 gun murders in the U.S. in 2019, 70-80% of the victims are criminals.......carrying illegal guns too.....and of the rest of the victims, they are the friends and family of the criminal caught in the attempt to shoot the actual criminal....


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> That can be a crime in and of itself. People who carry firearms are more, not less, likely to be shot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Looked at the article...of course they make no distinction between the criminals who carry and use guns illegally and normal people, over 21.5 million Americans who now carry guns in public for self defense......

That is how you were fooled.....criminals are the ones getting shot and killed, not normal Americans...do you understand the difference?


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> That can be a crime in and of itself. People who carry firearms are more, not less, likely to be shot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And this is the line that shows that article is dumb...

*While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot,*

Read more: Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed

Yes....criminals carrying guns for crime are more likely to get shot and killed by other criminals...since they are the majority of people who are shot and killed by guns....


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> The DOJ says 1 million defensive uses of a firearm at a minimum.
> Many people estimate over 2.5 million, because they are never reported.
> The way to get a feel for the scale is that over 1 million violent crimes are successful every year, so likely many more times that are unsuccessful.
> 
> ...




The research...

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense 

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

2021 national firearm survey, Prof. William English, PhD. designed by Deborah Azrael of Harvard T. Chan School of public policy, and  Mathew Miller, Northeastern university.......1.67 million defensive uses annually.

CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million  averaged over  those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the _Journal of Quantitative Criminology_,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. _Journal of Quantitative Criminology_, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*2021 national firearms survey..*

The survey was designed by Deborah Azrael of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Matthew Miller of Northeastern University,
----
The survey further finds that approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. Handguns are the most common firearm employed for self-defense (used in 65.9% of defensive incidents), and in most defensive incidents (81.9%) no shot was fired. Approximately a quarter (25.2%) of defensive incidents occurred within the gun owner's home, and approximately half (53.9%) occurred outside their home, but on their property. About one out of ten (9.1%) defensive gun uses occurred in public, and about one out of twenty (4.8%) occurred at work.
2021 National Firearms Survey


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> England's crime rate is steadily rising.




Yes...this is something the anti-gun extremists don't understand or want to admit...

Britain and Europe suffered setbacks in their societies because of the massive destruction of World War 2.....while the U.S. implemented the "Great Society," which went on to create a now over 75% out of wedlock birthrate among black families in the U.S...the social welfare states in Europe took longer to do this...

In the U.S. ...out of wedlock birthrate among black Americans is over 75%.....black males make up 7% o the population...but commit over 50% of the murder...and are also the majority of murder victims...

In Britain, the out of wedlock birth rate is about 45%....but growing...they have also imported males from war torn 3rd world countries that do not understand or respect British laws or culture......

The immigrants have taken over the drug trade in Britain and they have are becoming more and more prone to use guns for retaliation and protection of drug turf.....


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 13, 2021)

2aguy said:


> And this is the line that shows that article is dumb...
> 
> *While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot,*
> 
> ...


I did read it. Victims are more likely to get shot when carrying guns. 
“Overall, Branas’s study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.”

Read more: Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 13, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Looked at the article...of course they make no distinction between the criminals who carry and use guns illegally and normal people, over 21.5 million Americans who now carry guns in public for self defense......
> 
> That is how you were fooled.....criminals are the ones getting shot and killed, not normal Americans...do you understand the difference?


A victim is a victim is a victim.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> I did read it. Victims are more likely to get shot when carrying guns.
> “Overall, Branas’s study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.”
> 
> Read more: Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed




And where in that quote does it define who the people carrying the guns are?  Are they criminals?   Likely yes.  That is the bait and switch anti-gun extremists do to hide the truth......

10,258 gun murders in the U.S......

70-80% of the victims are criminals, not normal people.

Of the rest, the vast majority of victims are the friends and family of the criminal, shot in the attempted murder of their criminal friend or family member....

600 million guns in private hands.  Over 21.5 million Americans can now carry guns in public for self defense...

Accidental gun deaths in 2019?

458....

Tell us how the people in your link aren't criminals...........and that the fact they didn't explain they were criminals isn't their attempt to hide the truth....


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> A victim is a victim is a victim.




That is just fucking stupid......

Criminals are the majority of gun murder victims...their friends and family are the next highest number....

Normal gun owners are not shooting each other, or getting shot.....

To not explain this, as your link fails to do....is lying...in order to promote gun control.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2021)

A Bible.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> I did read it. Victims are more likely to get shot when carrying guns.
> “Overall, Branas’s study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.”
> 
> Read more: Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed



Victims are not just victims when they are criminals ....


Baltimore...

*http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-2017-homicide-data-breakdown-20180103-story.html*
*

*
*About 86 percent of the victims and 85 percent of the 118 suspects identified by police had prior criminal records.** And about 46 percent of victims and 44 percent of suspects had previously been arrested for gun crimes, the data show.

----

The average homicide victim in Baltimore in 2017 had 11 previous arrests on his record. About 73 percent had drug arrests, and nearly 50 percent had been arrested for a violent crime. About 30 percent were on parole or probation at the time they were killed, and more than 6 percent were on parole or probation for a gun crime.

Twenty percent of the victims were known members of a gang or drug crew, according to the data.

The average homicide suspect, meanwhile, had 9 previous arrests on his record. About 70 percent had drug arrests, and nearly half had been arrested for a violent crime. Nearly 36 percent were on parole or probation, and 6 percent were on parole or probation for a gun crime, the data show.

Eighteen percent of the suspects were known members of a gang or drug crew, according to the data.

Police did not know the motive behind nearly half of the killings, but at least 20 were related to retaliation, according to the data.


=============

Chicago..


Actual report on shootings in chicago...http://urbanlabs.uchicago.edu/attac...cagoCrimeLab+Gun+Violence+in+Chicago+2016.pdf


1/19/17   Shooters in Chicago criminal record research from U of C








Nearly 40 percent of victims had more than 10 prior arrests, while the share with more than 20 prior arrests rose from 14 to 18 percent in 2016.

The share of victims with a current or prior gang affiliation as recorded by CPD was about the same in both years (53 and 54 percent).
And now the shooters . . .

Individuals arrested for a homicide or shooting in Chicago in 2016 and 2015 had similar prior criminal records: around 90 percent had at least one prior arrest, approximately 50 percent had a prior arrest for a violent crime specifically, and almost 40 percent had a prior gun arrest.




The average person arrested for a homicide or shooting in both years had nearly 12 prior arrests, with almost 45 percent having had more than 10 prior arrests, and almost 20 percent having had more than 20 prior arrests.
Why is anyone in Chicago (or elsewhere) talking about gun control? Clearly, Chicago’s revolving door justice system is a failure that allows dangerous killers to roam the city streets.
============================


12/27/16 ** Gang shootings in Chicago over christmas..90% gang affiliated*
*

Gang Killers In Chicago Used Christmas Gatherings To Target Their Victims

Gang killers, knowing their targets would be home for Christmas, launched a bloody weekend of shootings in Chicago that left 11 dead and another 37 wounded.

"We now know that the majority of these shootings and homicides were targeted attacks by gangs against potential rivals who were at holiday gatherings. This was followed by several acts of retaliatory gun violence," police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said in a statement Monday.

--------------
The violence primarily occurred in areas with historical gang conflicts on the South and West Side of Chicago."

And this is what we keep telling you anti gunners and you refuse to believe it....
*
*"Ninety percent of those fatally wounded had gang affiliations,** criminal histories and were pre-identified by the department's strategic subject algorithm as being a potential suspect or victim of gun violence," Guglielmi said.
=*


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 13, 2021)

2aguy said:


> That is just fucking stupid......
> 
> Criminals are the majority of gun murder victims...their friends and family are the next highest number....
> 
> ...


Youre logic effin stupid. You think just because you’re a non criminal you won’t get shot if you pull a gun in a confrontation, that’s “ stupid”. What, you wear a sign saying “ I’m not a criminal but I’m armed . So leave me alone.”


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Let’s see your reference.



Here....

Most murder victims in big cities have criminal record

*A review of murder statistics across America shows that in many large cities, up to 90 percent of the victims have criminal records.*
*-------*
*The report concludes that “of the 2011 homicide victims, 77 percent (66) had a least one prior arrest and of the known 2011 homicide suspects 90 percent (74) had at least one prior arrest.”**
----------
In early 2012, after pressure put on the police by murder victims’ families in New Orleans, the police department stopped revealing whether or not the murder victim had a prior record.
---------------
Though data is no longer published in Baltimore, USA Today reported in 2007 that 91 percent of the then-205 murder victims in the city between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31, 2007, had criminal records.
---------
A WND review of the Philadelphia Police Department Murder and Shooting Analysis for 2011 shows a similar pattern to that of other large cities in America – a majority of the murder victims have prior records.

--------
In Philadelphia in 2011, of 324 murders, 81 percent (263) of the victims had at least one prior arrest; 62 percent (164) had been arrested for a violent crime prior to their murder.
----------
In Newark, N.J., long considered one of America’s most dangerous cities, 85 percent of the 165 murder victims between 2009 and 2010 had serious arrest histories.
Anthony Braga, a professor with the Rutgers-Newark School of Criminal Justice, told the Newark Star-Ledger that 85 percent of 165 murder victims in Newark between 2009 and 2010 had been arrested at least once before they were killed.
Those victims, he said, had, on average, 10 prior arrests on their criminal records.
A WND review of the Chicago Police Department Murder Analysis reports from 2003 to 2011 provides a statistical breakdown of the demographics of both the victims and offenders in the 4,265 murders in Chicago over that time period.*


***************

Public Health Pot Shots




These and other studies funded by the CDC focus on the presence or absence of guns, rather than the characteristics of the people who use them. Indeed, the CDC's Rosenberg claims in the journal_Educational Horizons_ that murderers are "ourselves--ordinary citizens, professionals, even health care workers": people who kill only because a gun happens to be available. 

Yet if there is one fact that has been incontestably established by homicide studies, it's that murderers are not ordinary gun owners but extreme aberrants whose life histories include drug abuse, serious accidents, felonies, and irrational violence. 

*Unlike "ourselves," roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have significant criminal records, averaging an adult criminal career of six or more years with four major felonies.*


Access to juvenile records would almost certainly show that the criminal careers of murderers stretch back into their adolescence. In _Murder in America_ (1994), the criminologists Ronald W. Holmes and Stephen T. Holmes report that murderers generally "have histories of committing personal violence in childhood, against other children, siblings, and small animals." 

Murderers who don't have criminal records usually have histories of psychiatric treatment or domestic violence that did not lead to arrest.
*Contrary to the impression fostered by Rosenberg and other opponents of gun ownership, the term "acquaintance homicide" does not mean killings that stem from ordinary family or neighborhood arguments. Typical acquaintance homicides include: an abusive man eventually killing a woman he has repeatedly assaulted; a drug user killing a dealer (or vice versa) in a robbery attempt; and gang members, drug dealers, and other criminals killing each other for reasons of economic rivalry or personal pique.*

 According to a 1993 article in the _Journal of Trauma_, 80 percent of murders in Washington, D.C., are related to the drug trade, while "84% of [Philadelphia murder] victims in 1990 had antemortem drug use or criminal history."
 A 1994 article in _The New England Journal of Medicine_reported that 71 percent of Los Angeles children and adolescents injured in drive-by shootings "were documented members of violent street gangs." And University of North Carolina-Charlotte criminal justice scholars Richard Lumb and Paul C. Friday report that 71 percent of adult gunshot wound victims in Charlotte have criminal records.

-------As the English gun control analyst Colin Greenwood has noted, in any society there are always enough guns available, legally or illegally, to arm the violent. The true determinant of violence is the number of violent people, not the availability of a particular weapon. Guns contribute to murder in the trivial sense that they help violent people kill. But owning guns does not turn responsible, law-abiding people into killers. If the general availability of guns were as important a factor in violence as the CDC implies, the vast increase in firearm ownership during the past two decades should have led to a vast increase in homicide. The CDC suggested just that in a 1989 report to Congress, where it asserted that "ince the early 1970s the year-to-year fluctuations in firearm availability has [sic] paralleled the numbers of homicides."
-----


Here.....Chicago...


Chicago police boss calls weekend gun violence 'completely unacceptable'

At an unrelated news conference Monday on the city's Southwest Side, Johnson brought up the Mother's Day weekend violence himself in his prepared remarks. He focused his remarks on how much of the bloodshed is being driven by about 1,300 individuals on the Police Department's "strategic subject list" — those believed to be most prone to violence as a victim or offender.

*About 78 percent of the homicide victims and about 84 percent of the nonfatal shooting victims this weekend were on the list, he said.*

"That means essentially we know who they are," he told reporters at 50th Street and South Karlov Avenue, where a Chicago police officer fatally shot a bank robbery suspect on Monday. "Oftentimes, they have gang affiliations, and many have had previous arrests and convictions."
----------
H*e then ticked off nearly 10 examples of how many arrests these victims had on their records, ranging from 20 each all the way up to 41.*
5/7/16 Australian murder report p.20 criminals commit murder...

http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/mr/mr01/mr01.pdf

Criminal history Figure 18 shows that in 2006–07, a significant proportion both of homicide offenders and of homicide victims had a criminal history. Nearly two-thirds of male offenders and half of female offenders had a prior criminal history. Half of male victims too had a criminal history, as did a quarter of female victims. These ratios have changed little throughout the years of monitoring. In 2006–07, the most common prior criminal history of offenders constituted ‘other assault’, property, and ‘other’ offences. ‘Other’ encompasses crimes such as fraud and traffic violations. Recidivist homicide offending was very low in 2006–07, with only two percent of offenders having a prior conviction of homicide. The high incidence of a prior criminal history of ‘other assault’ suggests that homicide is often not an isolated incident of violence but part of a longer-term pattern of violent behaviour. Of interest, little difference exists between the sexes of homicide offenders in this respect.

-------

Roy Exum: How We Stop The Bullets

David Kennedy, a renowned criminal justice professor and co-chair of the National Network for Safe Communities, believes that places like the 1500 block of East 50th Street where Deontrey was killed, or Central Avenue where two other Chattanoogans were shot around the same time, aren’t necessarily bad areas. Good people live in those areas, just as the overwhelming numbers of those who live in our inner city are decent and law-abiding citizens.

No, our new focus isn’t on neighborhoods like Alton Park or East Chattanooga but instead on “hot” places” and “hot” people. In an article entitled, “The Story Behind the Nation’s Falling Body Count,” Kennedy writes, “Research on hot spots shows violence to be concentrated in ‘micro’ places, rather than ‘dangerous neighborhoods,’ as the popular idea goes. Blocks, corners, and buildings representing just five or six percent of an entire city will drive half of its serious crime.”

*The same is true about people. “We now know that homicide and gun violence are overwhelmingly concentrated among serious offenders operating in groups: gangs, drug crews, and the like representing under half of one percent of a city's population who commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”

Read it once more: “ … under half of one percent … commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”*

It is vitally important for us to realize the recent “worst of the worst” roundup had very little to do with race, yet to the uninformed it clearly appeared that only blacks were targeted. 

Try to forget that all were black and focus instead on the far greater fact – there is ample evidence that each is alleged to be a serious criminal.

Kennedy writes, “We also know some reliable predictors of risk: individuals who have a history of violence or a close connection with prior victims are far more likely to be involved in violence themselves.


*Hot groups and people are so hot that when their offending is statistically abstracted, their neighborhoods cease to be dangerous. Their communities aren't dangerous; (these criminals) are.”*
*
------------------------------------*

PolitiFact - 85 percent of shooting suspects and victims in Milwaukee have "extensive criminal record," police chief says
Non-fatal shootings:

In non-fatal shootings in 2011, 97 percent of the 177 suspects and 86 percent of the 473 victims had at least one prior arrest. The report doesn’t say how many.

However, O’Brien said a closer analysis of non-fatal shootings during a six-week period in July and August 2011, when non-fatal shootings increased, found that suspects had an average of 7.5 prior arrests and victims had an average of about six. O’Brien said that based on her past studies, she would expect that the rest of the suspects and victims in the non-fatal shootings in 2011 had a similar number of prior arrests.

So, more than 85 percent of the people involved in non-fatal shootings had at least one prior arrest. And there’s a strong indication, though not complete numbers, that most people involved in the non-fatal shootings had at least several prior arrests.

Homicides:

For all homicides in 2011 -- those involving guns and those that didn’t -- 57 percent of the 72 suspects and 62 percent of the 66 homicide victims had at least six prior arrests.

O’Brien said that based on past studies she has done, most homicides involve guns and it’s unlikely that arrest records would vary greatly between the people involved in shooting homicides versus non-shooting homicides.

So, a clear majority, but less than 85 percent, of the people involved in fatal shootings likely had at least six prior arrests; although, again, the study doesn’t provide hard numbers on that point.

We asked James Alan Fox, a criminology, law and public policy professor at Northeastern University in Boston, about Flynn’s claim. He said from a national perspective, most shootings involve people with an arrest history, although he couldn’t say how extensive that history is for the typical shooting suspect or victim.

Our rating

Flynn said 85 percent of Milwaukee shootings "are people with extensive criminal records shooting other people with extensive criminal records."

The thrust of his statement -- that the vast majority of shooting suspects and victims have a criminal history, is accurate. But he made a specific statistical claim that isn’t fully supported by the study he cites. And as compared with charges or convictions, prior arrests as a measure of a person’s criminal record is on the lower end of the scale.
-----
When Gun Violence Felt Like a Disease, a City in Delaware Turned to the C.D.C. (Published 2015)



When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.

They were here to examine gun violence.

This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------



The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.

*“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,”*


the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”

Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.
--------

Beyond Gun Control

Lost in the debate is that even in high-crime cities, the risk of gun violence is mostly concentrated among a small number of men. In Oakland, for instance, crime experts working with the police department a few years ago found that about 1,000 active members of a few dozen street groups drove most homicides. That’s .3 percent of Oakland’s population. And even within this subgroup, risk fluctuated according to feuds and other beefs. In practical terms, the experts found that over a given stretch of several months only about 50 to 100 men are at the highest risk of shooting someone or getting shot.

Most of these men have criminal records. But it’s not drug deals or turf wars that drives most of the shootings.

Instead, the violence often starts with what seems to outsiders like trivial stuff—“a fight over a girlfriend, a couple of words, a dispute over a dice game,” said Vaughn Crandall, a senior strategist at the California Partnership for Safe Communities, which did the homicide analysis for Oakland.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Youre logic effin stupid. You think just because you’re a non criminal you won’t get shot if you pull a gun in a confrontation, that’s “ stupid”. What, you wear a sign saying “ I’m not a criminal but I’m armed . So leave me alone.”




Did I say that...no, you idiot...

What I did say?...... is that your link is lying........the majority of victims of gun murder are not normal people who carry or use guns for self defense...the majority of gun murder victims are criminals murdered by other criminals.......and of the rest of the gun murder victims the majority of those are the friends and family of the criminal hit by the bullets meant for the criminal.....


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Youre logic effin stupid. You think just because you’re a non criminal you won’t get shot if you pull a gun in a confrontation, that’s “ stupid”. What, you wear a sign saying “ I’m not a criminal but I’m armed . So leave me alone.”




I know...I ruined your post and your link with actual facts, truth and reality....you can't take it....so you make up something I didn't say....


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 13, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Youre logic effin stupid. You think just because you’re a non criminal you won’t get shot if you pull a gun in a confrontation, that’s “ stupid”. What, you wear a sign saying “ I’m not a criminal but I’m armed . So leave me alone.”


If you use stats for people who are LEGALLY carrying a concealed weapon your entire argument falls apart.

When you include people ILLEGALLY carrying concealed weapons all you prove is that criminals commit crimes


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 13, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> If you use stats for people who are LEGALLY carrying a concealed weapon your entire argument falls apart.
> 
> When you include people ILLEGALLY carrying concealed weapons all you prove is that criminals commit crimes




Exactly, which is why his source didn't state who was carrying the guns....


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 13, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> If you use stats for people who are LEGALLY carrying a concealed weapon your entire argument falls apart.
> 
> When you include people ILLEGALLY carrying concealed weapons all you prove is that criminals commit crimes


Well, where are they ?


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 13, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> So then why claim the UK has a lower crime rate?
> 
> And there are a lot of other violent crimes besides murder.


A simple assault in one jurisdiction may be aggravated assault in another.  Thus, crime rate is very difficult to measure.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 13, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Wrong...
> 
> _*We thought Bier’s points were reasonable, so we tried to replicate his approach. We looked at the raw violent crime numbers for each country, using statistics for England and Wales for 2012 and for the United States for 2011, in a way that sought to compare apples to apples. (We should note that the United Kingdom includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the numbers in the meme appear to be based only on crime in England and Wales, which are calculated separately.)*_
> 
> ...


Different jurisdictions have different definitions of Sexual Assault.  Aggravated Assault in one jurisdiction may be simple assault in another.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 15, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> If you use stats for people who are LEGALLY carrying a concealed weapon your entire argument falls apart.
> 
> When you include people ILLEGALLY carrying concealed weapons all you prove is that criminals commit crimes


Who legally can carry and who can’t is strictly a state law, other then being a convicted felon and being under aged. The idea that criminals have all been convicted previously and there fore can be easily determined is ridiculous. All people engaged in criminal behavior ARE NOT CONVICTED felons so that  idea is all wet. Criminals about to commit crimes with weapons don’t care who pulls a firearm in retaliation. They will more likely shoot you then if you don’t. That’s why it’s pretty cut and dry. You carry a firearm, you’re more likely to get shot yourself. To claim otherwise completely defies logic.
The stats  speak for themselves. I have a permit and I carry regularly given where I live, if I go into town, the weapon stays home. Why ? Because the stats don’t lie.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 15, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Well, where are they ?











						Concealed Carry Facts and Fiction | Gun Facts and Fiction | USCCA
					

The USCCA has compiled the top myths about concealed carry permit holders and sorted out the fact from the fiction. Our goal is to provide sound and objective information.




					www.usconcealedcarry.com


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 15, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Who legally can carry and who can’t is strictly a state law, other then being a convicted felon and being under aged. The idea that criminals have all been convicted previously and there fore can be easily determined is ridiculous. All people engaged in criminal behavior ARE NOT CONVICTED felons so that  idea is all wet. Criminals about to commit crimes with weapons don’t care who pulls a firearm in retaliation. They will more likely shoot you then if you don’t. That’s why it’s pretty cut and dry. You carry a firearm, you’re more likely to get shot yourself. To claim otherwise completely defies logic.
> The stats  speak for themselves. I have a permit and I carry regularly given where I live, if I go into town, the weapon stays home. Why ? Because the stats don’t lie.



Wrong.  Most criminals arent in it to fight a gun fight and run away when a gun is revealed or drawn by a normal citizen.   That is how you have 1.2 million defensive gun uses on average each year, according to the CDC, but inly about 258 dead criminals each year.

You dont understand human nature or human history.


----------



## Mac-7 (Nov 15, 2021)

whitehall said:


> The phrase "stopping a crook" has several meanings and several venues. Most firearm related incidents that "stop a crook" involve the mere brandishing of a weapon. As far as a homeowner confronting a potential burglar in the middle of the night nothing does it better than the big muzzle of a shotgun. You can get a single barrel shotgun for a reasonable price and cut the barrel down to a legal federal limit and load that bad boy up with #4 duck loads and you have a kickass weapon.


Better yet get a pump and rack the slide

Even the dumbest crook knows what that sound represents


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 15, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> A simple assault in one jurisdiction may be aggravated assault in another.  Thus, crime rate is very difficult to measure.


And yet you claimed that the UK has a lower crime rate.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 15, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Who legally can carry and who can’t is strictly a state law, other then being a convicted felon and being under aged. The idea that criminals have all been convicted previously and there fore can be easily determined is ridiculous. All people engaged in criminal behavior ARE NOT CONVICTED felons so that  idea is all wet. Criminals about to commit crimes with weapons don’t care who pulls a firearm in retaliation. They will more likely shoot you then if you don’t. That’s why it’s pretty cut and dry. You carry a firearm, you’re more likely to get shot yourself. To claim otherwise completely defies logic.
> The stats  speak for themselves. I have a permit and I carry regularly given where I live, if I go into town, the weapon stays home. Why ? Because the stats don’t lie.


The fact is that people who legally carry concealed weapons are some of the most law abiding people in the country.  Stats don't lie.


----------



## Man of Ethics (Nov 15, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> And yet you claimed that the UK has a lower crime rate.


OK, UK has lower murder rate.  I do not know how can crime rate be measured.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 15, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> The fact is that people who legally carry concealed weapons are some of the most law abiding people in the country.  Stats don't lie.


What stats are those?


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 16, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> OK, UK has lower murder rate.  I do not know how can crime rate be measured.


And there's more to the murder rate than just guns.

The UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US even before they passed the draconian gun laws you love so much


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 16, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> And there's more to the murder rate than just guns.
> 
> The UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US even before they passed the draconian gun laws you love so much


The US murder rate w/o firearms is higher than the UK murder rate.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 17, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> And there's more to the murder rate than just guns.
> 
> The UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US even before they passed the draconian gun laws you love so much


It’s hilarious how the two parties disagree on gun control. The majority of democrats are looking  for ways to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, while the repos are arguing for ways to increase the sales of all firearms to appease their donors. They are mutually exclusive ideas.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 17, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> It’s hilarious how the two parties disagree on gun control. The majority of democrats are looking  for ways to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, while the repos are arguing for ways to increase the sales of all firearms to appease their donors. They are mutually exclusive ideas.


No the dems want to ban this gun or that gun and want more laws even though the laws we already have aren't being enforced.

Any person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm who is arrested for possession of a firearm is committing a federal crime punishable by a 5 year stint in federal prison.

If you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals then start prosecuting them instead of dropping gun charges.









						In Delaware, 71% of gun charges are dropped
					

While 71 percent of charges are dropped, state prosecutors say convictions of some sort in firearms cases at 87 percent.



					www.delawareonline.com


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 17, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> It’s hilarious how the two parties disagree on gun control. The majority of democrats are looking  for ways to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, while the repos are arguing for ways to increase the sales of all firearms to appease their donors. They are mutually exclusive ideas.



Nothing the democrats demand will keep guns out if the hands of criminals....going back to the New Yorkdemocrat party Sullivan law they seek to keep normal people unable to buy and carry guns.   They could care less about stoppimg criminals......they attack the police and then release the most violent criminals over and over again


Nothing you posted is tru or accurate


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 17, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> No the dems want to ban this gun or that gun and want more laws even though the laws we already have aren't being enforced.
> 
> Any person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm who is arrested for possession of a firearm is committing a federal crime punishable by a 5 year stint in federal prison.
> 
> ...


You make those claI’m with no evidence. You also repeat  the same false narrative. Every firearm made commercially is supposed to be sold only through a an FFL dealer which requires a background check
 Its pretty fking obvious that with all the criminals and illegal people possessing firearms, it’s legal purchasers who are the conduit for criminal firearm use. You’re mistaken, again and again. We have a trial going on where a legal buyer participated in a straw purchaser for a person under 18 who shot and killed two people Possessing a firearm he didn’t purchase was not hunting with and had no legal right to possess it.  There are no laws on the books that prevent legal owner  from UNKNOWINGLY  selling  a gun to a criminal, too young or otherwise unqualified persons.

Nothing, nada, nix


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 17, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You make those claim  with no evidence. You also repeat  the same false narrative. Every firearm made commercially is supposed to be sold only through a an FFL dealer which requires a background check
> Its pretty fking obvious that with all the criminals and illegal people possessing firearms, it’s legal purchasers who are the conduit for criminal firearm use. You’re mistaken, again and again. We have a trial going on where a legal buyer participated in a straw purchaser for a person under 18 who shot and killed two people Possessing a firearm. The defendant didn’t purchase, was not hunting with and  had no legal right to possess it.  There are no Federal laws on the books that prevent a legal or original buyer /  owner  from UNKNOWINGLY  selling  a gun to a criminal, too young or otherwise unqualified persons.
> 
> Nothing, nada, nix


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 17, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You make those cla8ms with no evidence. You also ride the same false narrative. Every firearm made commercially is supposed to be sold only through a an FFL dealer which requires a background check
> Its pretty fking obvious that with all the criminals and illegal people possessing firearms, it’s legal purchasers who are the conduit for criminal firearm use. You’re mistaken, again and again. We have a trial going on where a legal buyer participated in a straw purchaser for a person under 18 who shot and killed two people Possessing a firearm he didn’t purchase was not hunting with and had no legal right to possess it. ,




Moron....legal purchasers are not the ones supplying gangs and criminals.....straw buyers, knowingly breaking the law are supplying the criminals...the baby mommas, mothers, grand mothers, sisters are the ones walking into gun stores, knowing they are buying the gun for their criminal baby daddy or relative.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 17, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Its pretty fking obvious that with all the criminals and illegal people possessing firearms, it’s legal purchasers who are the conduit for criminal firearm use.


In what manner?


Dagosa said:


> You’re mistaken, again and again. We have a trial going on where a legal buyer participated in a straw purchaser for a person under 18...


No one is on trial for this.


Dagosa said:


> Possessing a firearm he didn’t purchase was not hunting with and had no legal right to possess it.


Rittemhouse was in legal possession of the firearm.


Dagosa said:


> There are no laws on the books that prevent legal owner  from UNKNOWINGLY  selling  a gun to a criminal, too young or otherwise unqualified persons.


Of course not - why would there be?


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 17, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Nothing the democrats demand will keep guns out if the hands of criminals....going back to the New Yorkdemocrat party Sullivan law they seek to keep normal people unable to buy and carry guns.   They could care less about stoppimg criminals......they attack the police and then release the most violent criminals over and over again
> 
> 
> Nothing you posted is tru or accurate


Nothing you posted is true. You’re totally confused.
By itemizing which you now do for SALT deductions, you qualifying tax burden easily surpasses that for taxes other then property taxes
,it’s the middle class property owner who losses the ability to deduct his property tax. You have to MAKE A CHOICE  NOW in deductions. 

The SALT deduction allows you to deduct your payments *for property tax payments and either income or sales tax payments*
The maximum SALT deduction is $10,000, but there was no cap before 2018
You must itemize using Schedule A to claim the SALT deduction; most people do not qualify to itemize


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 17, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Nothing you posted is true. You’re totally confused.
> By itemizing which you now do for SALT deductions, you qualifying tax burden easily surpasses that for taxes other then property taxes
> ,it’s the middle class property owner who losses the ability to deduct his property tax. You have to MAKE A CHOICE  NOW in deductions.
> 
> ...



Wrong thread dipshit...


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 18, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You make those claI’m with no evidence. You also repeat  the same false narrative. Every firearm made commercially is supposed to be sold only through a an FFL dealer which requires a background check
> Its pretty fking obvious that with all the criminals and illegal people possessing firearms, it’s legal purchasers who are the conduit for criminal firearm use. You’re mistaken, again and again. We have a trial going on where a legal buyer participated in a straw purchaser for a person under 18 who shot and killed two people Possessing a firearm he didn’t purchase was not hunting with and had no legal right to possess it.  There are no laws on the books that prevent legal owner  from UNKNOWINGLY  selling  a gun to a criminal, too young or otherwise unqualified persons.
> 
> Nothing, nada, nix


No you're wrong.

Private sales are allowed by law.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 18, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> No you're wrong.
> 
> Private sales are allowed by law.


You‘re obviously pretending you’re confused. You’re absolutely wrong.  Private sales to unqualified buyers IS NOT ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW. FFL dealers are required to ascertain that the buyers qualifications, private sellers are not. Therefore, they sell to unqualified peoples unknowingly.
Enforceable regulations need a provision for enforcement. The private sale regulation does not have one.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 18, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You‘re obviously pretending you’re confused. You’re absolutely wrong.  Private sales to unqualified buyers IS NOT ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW. FFL dealers are required to ascertain that the buyers qualifications, private sellers are not. Therefore, they sell to unqualified peoples unknowingly.
> Enforceable regulations need a provision for enforcement. The private sale regulation does not have one.




Nope...the only reason a shithead like you wants to do background checks on private sales is to demand gun registration...which is what you actually want....since you don't care about criminals getting guns, since you support the democrats releasing violent gun offenders over and over again......

What we need is access to NICS on a phone app for anyone who wants to do a background check.....no fee, no record, seconds to do...but you guys won't support that because the goal is registration of guns.....so later you will be able to confiscate and ban them...


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 18, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You‘re obviously pretending you’re confused. You’re absolutely wrong.  Private sales to unqualified buyers IS NOT ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW.


Private -sales- to "unqualified buyers" is only prohibited by federal law when the seller knows, or should know, the buyer is an "unqualified buyer".
The -purchase- of a firearm by an "unqualified buyer" is always against federal la.w


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 18, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> Private -sales- to "unqualified buyers" is only prohibited by federal law when the seller knows, or should know, the buyer is an "unqualified buyer".
> The -purchase- of a firearm by an "unqualified buyer" is always against federal la.w


Hence the term  “unknowingly“ . . FFL dealers ARE REQUIRED TO KNOW. Private sales sellers are not. Hence, ALL unqualified gun possessors started  out  with legal sales.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 18, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Nope...the only reason a shithead like you wants to do background checks on private sales is to demand gun registration...which is what you actually want....since you don't care about criminals getting guns, since you support the democrats releasing violent gun offenders over and over again......
> 
> What we need is access to NICS on a phone app for anyone who wants to do a background check.....no fee, no record, seconds to do...but you guys won't support that because the goal is registration of guns.....so later you will be able to confiscate and ban them...


Oh, another internet tough guy a-hole.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 18, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> He seems the term  “unknowingly“ . . FFL dealers ARE REQUIRED TO KNOW. Private sales sellers are not.


You said:
_Private sales to unqualified buyers IS NOT ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW.       _ 
This is not true.


> Hence, ALL unqualified gun possessors started  out  with legal sales.


Sure.  
Some are stolen from police departments.  Some are stolen from the military.  Some are stolen from private parties.  Some are sold to individualss who cannot legally buy a gun.
What's your point?


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 19, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You‘re obviously pretending you’re confused. You’re absolutely wrong.  Private sales to unqualified buyers IS NOT ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW. FFL dealers are required to ascertain that the buyers qualifications, private sellers are not. Therefore, they sell to unqualified peoples unknowingly.
> Enforceable regulations need a provision for enforcement. The private sale regulation does not have one.


Wrong again.

the law states that a private seller can't KNOWINGLY sell to a person who is prohibited by law from owning a firearm.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 19, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> the law states that a private seller can't KNOWINGLY sell to a person who is prohibited by law from owning a firearm.




That just burns them up when they see that..........they want gun registration so bad it drives them nuts......they know that universal background checks is the path to gun registration, so they will twist themselves into pretzels with their desire to push UBCs...........

The only reason they care about private gun sales is to get Universal background checks...something they need in order to demand gun registration....


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> the law states that a private seller can't KNOWINGLY sell to a person who is prohibited by law from owning a firearm.


If you could read for understanding you’d know that’s what I’ve been saying. Dah.
it simply means that you can sell to a criminal if you don’t ask him, “are you a criminal” ? It’s a laughable situation. Gun transfer from legal buyers in private sales to criminals and underage ( see Rentenhouse )  happens with ease. ” can’t knowingly “ and  “can unknowingly “ implies the same thing…burp. 
In Retenhouse case it’s going to prosecuted because the sale is on recorded from a dealer, but it couldn’t be in private sale. So you’re wrong again, and again.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

2aguy said:


> That just burns them up when they see that..........they want gun registration so bad it drives them nuts......they know that universal background checks is the path to gun registration, so they will twist themselves into pretzels with their desire to push UBCs...........
> 
> The only reason they care about private gun sales is to get Universal background checks...something they need in order to demand gun registration....


Only gun registration for people you seem to support who want to sell to criminals, the under aged, convicted wife beaters and rapists and crazy people like Trump..


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> If you could read for understanding you’d know that’s what I’ve been saying. Dah.
> it simply means that you can sell to a criminal if you don’t ask him, “are you a criminal” ? It’s a laughable situation. Gun transfer from legal buyers in private sales to criminals and underage ( see Rentenhouse )  happens with ease. ” can’t knowingly “ and  “can unknowingly “ implies the same thing…burp.
> In Retenhouse case it’s going to prosecuted because the sale is on recorded from a dealer, but it couldn’t be in private sale. So you’re wrong again, and again.




It doesn't happen much at all.....the straw buyers selling to criminals know what they are doing and they are knowingly committing an illegal act....criminals are not getting their guns from the guy who wants to sell his old Glock to finance getting the new one.......

Just be honest and admit you want universal background checks because you need them to convince uninformed people to give you gun registration........at least be fucking honest for once.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Only gun registration for people you seem to support who want to sell to criminals, the under aged, convicted wife beaters and rapists and crazy people like Trump..




The women beaters and rapists are the ones you shitheads keep defending in Kenosha....


----------



## Whodatsaywhodat. (Nov 20, 2021)

Donald H said:


> As always, no gun is better than having any gun if the objective is to live to see sunset.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Says the dumb ass Canadian... don't worry bout it boy , just bend over ....


----------



## Donald H (Nov 20, 2021)

Whodatsaywhodat. said:


> Says the dumb ass Canadian... don't worry bout it boy , just bend over ....


That sort of behavioiur serves no purpose and it has no effect on adults who are trying to preserve at least some usefulness of this board.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

2aguy said:


> It doesn't happen much at all.....the straw buyers selling to criminals know what they are doing and they are knowingly committing an illegal act....criminals are not getting their guns from the guy who wants to sell his old Glock to finance getting the new one.......
> 
> Just be honest and admit you want universal background checks because you need them to convince uninformed people to give you gun registration........at least be fucking honest for once.


Just admit it. You want to unload all your  used guns on anyone who will  pay an inflated price, whether their criminals or not, you don’t care.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Just admit it. You want to unload all your  used guns on anyone who will  pay an inflated price, whether their criminals or not, you don’t care.




You are funny ........

You want guns registered....so when you get the power you can ban and confiscate them....but you need gun registration to do it...just like in Britain, France, Germany, New Zealand, Canada, Australia.............


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

K


2aguy said:


> doesn't happen much at all.....the straw buyers selling to criminals know what they are doing and they are knowingly committing an illegal act....criminals are not getting their guns from the guy who wants to sell his old Glock to finance getting the new one.......


Doing stuff unknowingly seems to be where gunaholics  excel. It sounds like someone who’s  been selling to criminals all his  life and knows how to beat the system.
Just play dumb, take the money, hand the gun over. Wow…..got that one down.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Just admit it. You want to unload all your  used guns on anyone who will  pay an inflated price, whether their criminals or not, you don’t care.


^^^^
Unsupportable nonsense.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> K
> 
> Doing stuff unknowingly seems to be where gunaholics  excel. It sounds like someone who’s  been selling to criminals all his  life and knows how to beat the system.
> Just play dumb, take the money, hand the gun over. Wow…..got that one down.




You are an idiot........straw buyers are selling guns to criminals as a criminal act, not out of ignorance, you doofus....

Admit it...you want guns registered so you can ban and confiscate them...just be honest you hack....


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

2aguy said:


> You are an idiot........straw buyers are selling guns to criminals as a criminal act, not out of ignorance, you doofus....
> 
> Admit it...you want guns registered so you can ban and confiscate them...just be honest you hack....


Ha ha
Thats hilarious. You’ll sell a gun to anyone, no questions asked. Aamof, the less you know, the safer you are. That’s the unknowingly bit. Just play dumb. There is no such thing as a straw buyer in a private sale . You didn’t know that ? . There are no required forms to fill out. Just a dumb ass seller happy to unload a gun to anyone with money. No questions asked. There are a plethora of publications linking you guys up with buyers.

Absolutely I’d want people like you to have to register your guns. You don’t even care about criminals and juveniles and fools  getting guns. You support it.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> ^^^^
> Unsupportable nonsense.


That’s the whole idea. Just play dumb and you’re home  free….Mr unknowingly. You do that so well.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> If you could read for understanding you’d know that’s what I’ve been saying. Dah.
> it simply means that you can sell to a criminal if you don’t ask him, “are you a criminal” ? It’s a laughable situation. Gun transfer from legal buyers in private sales to criminals and underage ( see Rentenhouse )  happens with ease. ” can’t knowingly “ and  “can unknowingly “ implies the same thing…burp.
> In Retenhouse case it’s going to prosecuted because the sale is on recorded from a dealer, but it couldn’t be in private sale. So you’re wrong again, and again.



FYI there is no minimum age for the private sale of a rifle to anyone 









						Where do criminals really get their guns?
					

On average, just under 40,000 people each year die across the country in a gun-related death. So where do criminals typically buy their guns? And do most criminals seek out their weapons of choice through means, not above board?




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Just admit it. You want to unload all your  used guns on anyone who will  pay an inflated price, whether their criminals or not, you don’t care.


I have never bought or sold a gun in a private sale so stick your bullshit back up your ass where it belongs


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> I have never bought or sold a gun in a private sale so stick your bullshit back up your ass where it belongs


Maybe you “gifted “ one to someone who  couldn't pass a background check, another sneaky way of getting a firearm to illegal owners. There are so many loopholes it’s pathetic.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Maybe you “gifted “ one to someone who  couldn't pass a background check, another sneaky way of getting a firearm to illegal owners. There are so many loopholes it’s pathetic.


Maybe you're just a fucking asshole who has to make shit up and post it on the internet because you are a pathetic loser.

I have never given a gun to anyone.  I have never sold a gun to anyone.  All my guns were bought from a dealer and each purchase was subject to a background check. 

So take your bullshit assumptions and go fuck yourself.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Maybe you're just a fucking asshole who has to make shit up and post it on the internet because you are a pathetic loser.
> 
> I have never given a gun to anyone.  I have never sold a gun to anyone.  All my guns were bought from a dealer and each purchase was subject to a background check.
> 
> So take your bullshit assumptions and go fuck yourself.


Another Internet tough guy who needs to keep his “right”  to spread carnage throughout the country.
All but a small  number of every firearm was first sold at an FFL dealer. Illegal owners get them from people like gunaholics who luv to use the loop holes of secondary sales and gifting which is just a way 
that the  gun at that point has been diverted from legal commerce. In this respect, the supply chain for guns is similar to that for other products that have a large legal market but are subject to diversion.

“In the case of guns, diversion from licit possession and exchange can occur in a variety of ways: theft, purchase at a gun show by an interstate trafficker, private sales where no questions are asked, straw purchases by girlfriends and so forth. “ 


Which one do you prefer ?


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> FYI there is no minimum age for the private sale of a rifle to anyone


Wow, so now you’re promoting another way juveniles can transfer  guns to criminals and other juveniles. Thanks for reminding us all.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Another Internet tough guy who needs to keep his “right”  to spread carnage throughout the country.
> All but a small  number of every firearm was first sold at an FFL dealer. Illegal owners get them from people like gunaholics who luv to use the loop holes of secondary sales and gifting which is just a way
> that the  gun at that point has been diverted from legal commerce. In this respect, the supply chain for guns is similar to that for other products that have a large legal market but are subject to diversion.
> 
> ...



What criminals do is not my responsibility.

Moronic assholes like you can't seem to understand that.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Wow, so now you’re promoting another way juveniles can trans fear guns to criminals and other juveniles. Thanks for reminding us all.


I am stating a fact Dipshit.

Something you obviously don't know how to do.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> I am stating a fact Dipshit.
> 
> Something you obviously don't know how to do.


I leave it up to you to keep informing us how crimInals  and Gun a holics game the system to support easy access of firearms to literally, anyone who wants one. You must be speaking from experience.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> I am stating a fact Dipshit.


I bet you think so. Just keep reminding  us how weak the regulations are in spreading guns around after the initial sale from a dealer. Keep talking.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> What criminals do is not my responsibility.
> 
> Moronic assholes like you can't seem to understand that.


Of  course not. It’s never the responsibility of anyone to make it easy to give kids and criminals guns. After all, your first responsibility is to make sure gun dealers have an inexhaustible way of selling firearms indirectly to literally, any warm humanoid. Your just doing your part to keep the ball rolling.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> I bet you think so. Just keep reminding  us how weak the regulations are in spreading guns around after the initial sale from a dealer. Keep talking.



Do yor parents know you are on the computer again?  They ground you from using it and you sneak around and use it anyway.....they need to lock it up when they leave.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 20, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Do yor parents know you are on the computer again?  They ground you from using it and you sneak around and use it anyway.....they need to lock it up when they leave.


Obviously no one has taught you anything about parenting.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Obviously no one has taught you anything about parenting.



Hey, are you actually bulldog under a
different name?  That poster rambled on about private gun sales  just like you.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> That’s the whole idea. Just play dumb and you’re home  free….Mr unknowingly. You do that so well.


Since you missed the obvious point - let me be fore clear:

You said:
_You want to unload all your used guns on anyone who will  pay an inflated price, whether their criminals or not, you don’t care.     _ 

You know you cannot, in any way, demonstrate this nonsense to be true.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Maybe you “gifted “ one to someone who  couldn't pass a background check, another sneaky way of getting a firearm to illegal owners. There are so many loopholes it’s pathetic.


The Democrats wrote the law and Johnson signed it.  
Blame them


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 20, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> All but a small  number of every firearm was first sold at an FFL dealer. Illegal owners get them from people like gunaholics who luv to use the loop holes of secondary sales and gifting which is just a way


^^^^
Unsupportable nonsense.
If you "gift" a gun to someone you know cannot legally own one, you commit a federal felony.
If you buy a gun to sell to someone you know cannot legally own one, you commit a federal felony.


----------



## Whodatsaywhodat. (Nov 20, 2021)

Donald H said:


> That sort of behavioiur serves no purpose and it has no effect on adults who are trying to preserve at least some usefulness of this board.


There is no usefulness of gun grabbers . Especially from another country.  Mind your own fuckin business. Or is Canada utopia?


----------



## Concerned American (Nov 20, 2021)

Donald H said:


> As always, no gun is better than having any gun if the objective is to live to see sunset.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Only for you duck.  An intruder would take your gun away from your pansy ass, kill you with it and shove it up your ass.  Stay in Canada.


----------



## Concerned American (Nov 20, 2021)

ESDRAELON said:


> Yeah... you go with that. The gene pool can do without ya just fine.  The truth is you can find "data" to support anything you already believe.  IMO, those who push against 2A do so for political reasons and either already have security provided for them OR have never faced a situation where no cop was coming to help them and they KNEW IT.  New Orleans, post-Katrina is a perfect example.
> 
> Eventually, you'll find yourself living in a world totally *W*ithout *R*ule *O*f *L*aw.  It's on the horizon right now, in fact.  In THAT world there will be predators and prey.  The choices made now will determine which group you inhabit and for how long.  Choose well...


He's a useless fucking Trudeau canuck.  No known positive reason for his existence.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> I leave it up to you to keep informing us how crimInals  and Gun a holics game the system to support easy access of firearms to literally, anyone who wants one. You must be speaking from experience.


Criminals always game the system.
Are you too fucking stupid to realize that?

What a criminal does has nothing to do with me or any other law abiding gun owner.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Criminals always game the system.
> Are you too fucking stupid to realize that?
> 
> What a criminal does has nothing to do with me or any other law abiding gun owner.


They can only game the system with the help of people like you. Anyone who supports allowing gun sales to felons, the underaged and the mentally unfit because they “don’t care “ who the person is whom they transfer ownership to, IS THE PROBLEM. You and people like you who favor transfer of weapons without accountability are FOS. Many of you are internet  tough guys who would likely fold if you had to be honest and accountable. You are the “unknowingly” don’t give a shit group.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> They can only game the system with the help of people like you. Anyone who supports allowing gun sales to felons, the underaged and the mentally unfit because they “don’t care “ who the person is whom they transfer ownership to, IS THE PROBLEM. You and people like you who favor transfer of weapons without accountability are FOS. Many of you are internet  tough guys who would likely fold if you had to be honest and accountable.


Here you go again with your baseless assumptions.

You're the one being dishonest or perhaps it's just plain old stupidity.

Yeah I'm going with the latter.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Here you go again with your baseless assumptions.
> 
> You're the one being dishonest or perhaps it's just plain old stupidity.
> 
> Yeah I'm going with the latter.



The majority of gun owners support universal background checks. The majority of NRA members  support it. In states like Illinois they have found away to support legal transfer and make it easier for legal owners to buy and sell ammo and firearms to other legal purchasers.

Most support it because they aren’t as ignorant as your POV portrays you.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> The majority of gun owners support universal background checks. The majority of NRA members  support it. In state like Illinois they have found away to support legal transfer and make it easier for legal owners to buy and sell ammo and firearms to other legal purchasers.
> 
> Most support it because they aren’t as ignorant as your POV portrays you.


So what?

The majority of gun owners are not NRA members.  And lots of NRA members support BG checks.

You just keep proving how utterly ignorant you are


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Concerned American said:


> Only for you duck.  An intruder would take your gun away from your pansy ass, kill you with it and shove it up your ass.  Stay in Canada.


It’s the pansy ass who thinks he can’t go anywhere with out carrying an extension of his dick.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> The majority of gun owners support universal background checks. The majority of NRA members  support it. In states like Illinois they have found away to support legal transfer and make it easier for legal owners to buy and sell ammo and firearms to other legal purchasers.
> 
> Most support it because they aren’t as ignorant as your POV portrays you.


No we don't.  We understand registration is the first step to confiscation here.  Your country did exactly that before kicking in doors to take the weapons.  Being the Fascist that you are there.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> It’s the pansy ass who thinks he can’t go anywhere with out carrying an extension of his dick.


Fascist Troll detected.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> No we don't.  We understand registration is the first step to confiscation here.  Your country did exactly that before kicking in doors to take the weapons.  Being the Fascist that you are there.


To be honest a BG check is not necessarily registration.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> To be honest a BG check is not necessarily registration.


That can be debated.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> So what?
> 
> The majority of gun owners are not NRA members.  And lots of NRA members support BG checks.
> 
> You just keep proving how utterly ignorant you are


Repeating what I just said ? Well, at least you didn’t post without using the word “stupid”.
We have a plethora of federally controlled items we need checks and licenses for to transfer and own. We have a plethora of activities that we control by licensing. Licensing and permits  is the way we people more responsible in their conduct with unqualified peoples. Federally restricted items where both the transferee and the those receiving the item are held accountable are all VERY. Effective in controlling misuse. Otherwise, you’d have more carnage then we do now. 

I live in an area where blasting occurs frequently and no one has a problem  with the TNT being misused or getting into the wrong hands...it’s controlled the way all firearms should be.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> To be honest a BG check is not necessarily registration.


Exactly. Ask any legal  gun owner in Illinois. They have a workable system most legal gun owners actually like and there’s no firearm registration.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Repeating what I just said ? Well, at least you didn’t post without using the word “stupid”.
> We have a plethora of federally controlled items we need checks and licenses for to transfer and own. We have a plethora of activities that we control by licensing. Licensing and permits  is the way we people more responsible in their conduct with unqualified peoples. Federally restricted items where both the transferee and the those receiving the item are held accountable are all VERY. Effective in controlling misuse. Otherwise, you’d have more carnage then we do now.
> 
> I live in an area where blasting occurs frequently and no one has a problem  with the TNT being misused or getting into the wrong hands...it’s controlled the way all firearms should be.


Ignorance is stupidity by choice.

And I have never had a problem with firearms being misused.  But then again I'm not a fucking criminal.

I have a CC permit I don't think I should have to have one but I do.

If I can pass a BG check in one state There is no reason I shouldn't be able to buy a gun in another state.

If I can pass a BG check I shouldn't have to pay for a CC permit.

And when you find any instance where a stick of dynamite has been used for self defense let me know


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> That can be debated.


The fact is, many states do require BC for purchases without firearms registration.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Exactly. Ask any legal  gun owner in Illinois. They have a workable system most legal gun owners actually like and there’s no firearm registration.


And they also have one of the highest murder rates in the country.

In fact Chicago is one of those shit holes that has a murder rate so high it actually skews the numbers for the rest of the country.  So you just proved that all those gun laws don't do shit for reducing the murder rate.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> The fact is, many states do require BC for purchases without firearms registration.


It's still splitting hairs it is recorded.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> If I can pass a BG check I shouldn't have to pay for a CC permit.


You pay for BC already in both the retail and private sale price on every gun you purchase or sell.

It’s hilarious to think because you don’t care what anyone does with a firearm you transfer it to is not your responsibility. I’m glad you’re  not a licensed blaster around here. The only reason you have to pay for them is, they aren’t universal. You don’t pay a separate fee when you buy one at an FFL dealer. The cost of buying TNT is part of the price built in for  transference too. BFD.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> And they also have one of the highest murder rates in the country.
> 
> In fact Chicago is one of those shit holes that has a murder rate so high it actually skews the numbers for the rest of the country.  So you just proved that all those gun laws don't do shit for reducing the murder rate.


So you admit. You don’t know the difference between a city and a state. Ha ha
Illinois is among the state’s with less gun violence, even with Chicago.

Everytime anyone brings up Chicago it’s an admittance they don’t know much about geography. Hilarious.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> Fascist Troll detected.


Fascism....must be a favorite word of the uninformed.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Fascism....must be a favorite word of the uninformed.


If the shoe fits wear it.  Look around the world right now.  Fascist pricks everywhere.

Now put on your dang mask or get arrested.  pffft.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> If the shoe fits wear it.  Look around the world right now.  Fascist pricks everywhere.
> 
> Now put on your dang mask or get arrested.  pffft.


Hope your ventilator is licensed.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Repeating what I just said ? Well, at least you didn’t post without using the word “stupid”.
> We have a plethora of federally controlled items we need checks and licenses for to transfer and own. We have a plethora of activities that we control by licensing. Licensing and permits  is the way we people more responsible in their conduct with unqualified peoples. Federally restricted items where both the transferee and the those receiving the item are held accountable are all VERY. Effective in controlling misuse. Otherwise, you’d have more carnage then we do now.
> 
> I live in an area where blasting occurs frequently and no one has a problem  with the TNT being misused or getting into the wrong hands...it’s controlled the way all firearms should be.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> It's still splitting hairs it is recorded.


You’re making generalizations. States that have them  maybe  different in how they handle UBC.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Hope your ventilator is licensed.


Got Natural immunity.  And sorry the survival rate is still very high.

Now go hide in your closet and OBEY.  and keep telling yourself you believe in Freedom as you destroy anyone in your country who disagrees.

Sorry.  WE DON'T FUCKING OBEY HERE IN AMERICA.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You’re making generalizations. States that have them  maybe  different in how they handle UBC.


You do know that even buying a firearm from an FFL dealer is not federally registered UNLESS it’s a restricted item. So much for that bogus argument.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You’re making generalizations. States that have them  maybe  different in how they handle UBC.


Of course they are.  Some are full fledged I hate guns states and other states are up yours states.

That is why they have tried so hard to change the definition of the 2nd.  Doesn't work here.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

eagle1462010 said:


> Got Natural immunity.  And sorry the survival rate is still very high.
> 
> Now go hide in your closet and OBEY.  and keep telling yourself you believe in Freedom as you destroy anyone in your country who disagrees.
> 
> Sorry.  WE DON'T FUCKING OBEY HERE IN AMERICA.


Babble.


----------



## Turtlesoup (Nov 21, 2021)

Relative Ethics said:


> UK has lower crime rate then USA.


Yet, we know that London and such are crime havens where people fear to go...so it sounds like the Brits aren't reporting crime as they should be doing.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Babble.


Truth.  Red states don't give a damned about your pushing gun control  Same with the BS Covid demands.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You pay for BC already in both the retail and private sale price on every gun you purchase or sell.
> 
> It’s hilarious to think because you don’t care what anyone does with a firearm you transfer it to is not your responsibility. I’m glad you’re  not a licensed blaster around here. The only reason you have to pay for them is, they aren’t universal. You don’t pay a separate fee when you buy one at an FFL dealer. The cost of buying TNT is part of the price built in for  transference too. BFD.


If you don't understand what I wrote ask for clarification.

A CC permit is for concealed carry


----------



## 1srelluc (Nov 21, 2021)

12ga makes the grass grow.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> They can only game the system with the help of people like you. Anyone who supports allowing gun sales to felons, the underaged and the mentally unfit because they “don’t care “ who the person is whom they transfer ownership to, IS THE PROBLEM. You and people like you who favor transfer of weapons without accountability are FOS. Many of you are internet  tough guys who would likely fold if you had to be honest and accountable. You are the “unknowingly” don’t give a shit group.


^^^^
A lie


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> The majority of gun owners support universal background checks. The majority of NRA members  support it.


Demonstrate this to be true
Then demonstrate that an idea, by virtue of it being popular, is a sound idea.


Dagosa said:


> In states like Illinois they have found away to support legal transfer and make it easier for legal owners to buy and sell ammo and firearms to other legal purchasers.


Yes....
"The seller must verify the buyer's FOID card with the Illinois State Police, and must keep a record of the sale for at least ten years."

Illinois requires a license for the basic exercise of a right.
Thus, for it to work the same way across the US, you would have to obtain a license from the US government to simply own a gun.

How long do you think that would stand in federal court?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> It’s the pansy ass who thinks he can’t go anywhere with out carrying an extension of his dick.


Said no rational reasoned person, ever.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> We have a plethora of federally controlled items we need checks and licenses for to transfer and own.


How many of therm involve the basic exercise of rights specifically protected by the constitution?


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Repeating what I just said ? Well, at least you didn’t post without using the word “stupid”.
> We have a plethora of federally controlled items we need checks and licenses for to transfer and own. We have a plethora of activities that we control by licensing. Licensing and permits  is the way we people more responsible in their conduct with unqualified peoples. Federally restricted items where both the transferee and the those receiving the item are held accountable are all VERY. Effective in controlling misuse. Otherwise, you’d have more carnage then we do now.
> 
> I live in an area where blasting occurs frequently and no one has a problem  with the TNT being misused or getting into the wrong hands...it’s controlled the way all firearms should be.




None of the are Rights.......you can't charge a fee to vote, you can't require a license to vote...no, an I.D. is not a license...it is identification.......you can't have a permit to vote......the democrats like you tried that against blacks in the south and both poll taxes and literacy tests were stopped...they are unConstitutional.....

The Supreme Court in Murdock v Pennsylvania also state that you can't charge a fee for the exercise of a Right.....you doofus.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Exactly. Ask any legal  gun owner in Illinois. They have a workable system most legal gun owners actually like and there’s no firearm registration.




The FOID system is in court right now you doofus.........


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

2aguy said:


> The FOID system is in court right now you doofus.........


Hey dumbo…..I know you’re trying to make a point, but it isn’t working.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> How many of therm involve the basic exercise of rights specifically protected by the constitution?


Every single one of them, without exception. You need a course on constitutional law. Federal regs all have to pass the present interpretation of the past and present SC Decisions. It’s hilarious why you guys just make up shit and pretend you know wtf you are talking about.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

2aguy said:


> None of the are Rights.......you can't charge a fee to vote, you can't require a license to vote...no, an I.D. is not a license...it is identification.......you can't have a permit to vote......the democrats like you tried that against blacks in the south and both poll taxes and literacy tests were stopped...they are unConstitutional.....
> 
> The Supreme Court in Murdock v Pennsylvania also state that you can't charge a fee for the exercise of a Right.....you doofus.


Have no idea what your point is after that ramble of made up sht. We know the right to bear arms is not absolute. Aamof, universal background checks mandated by 14 states have not been overturned. So you’re FOS.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> Demonstrate this to be true
> Then demonstrate that an idea, by virtue of it being popular, is a sound idea.
> 
> Yes....
> ...


You like to deal with make believes Dorothy ? Why don’t you go to Illinois’s and try to buy a firearm or ammo without a card NOW.  Snowflake righties can’t keep records. Boo boo. Maybe  someone  else does your taxes for you too.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> If you don't understand what I wrote ask for clarification.
> 
> A CC permit is for concealed carry


Why are you introducing a red herring ? You have to pay for your driver’s license too. Weren’t we talking about BC s. Btw, I’ve had a CC for decades and willing pay to have it renewed. No dealer has ever asked to see it when I’ve legally purchased a firearm. It’s a non item. Find something else to whine about.


----------



## Donald H (Nov 21, 2021)

Concerned American said:


> Only for you duck.  An intruder would take your gun away from your pansy ass, kill you with it and shove it up your ass.  Stay in Canada.


There's very little chance of an intruder and zero chance of me having a gun to shove anywhere.
More important than that, you're still fully stoked up pissant.


----------



## Donald H (Nov 21, 2021)

Whodatsaywhodat. said:


> There is no usefulness of gun grabbers . Especially from another country.  Mind your own fuckin business.


Request denied.


Whodatsaywhodat. said:


> Or is Canada utopia?


In the eyes of visiting Americans to Canada, we are their utopia! They come to Canada to lower their blood pressure and stock up on pharmaceuticals. Insulin sales are through the roof!


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 21, 2021)

Donald H said:


> Request denied.
> 
> In the eyes of visiting Americans to Canada, we are their utopia! They come to Canada to lower their blood pressure and stock up on pharmaceuticals. Insulin sales are through the roof!




Yeah....drugs you get on the cheap after American companies pay billions to create them......you are proud to be living off the creativity and hard work of American companies....


----------



## Concerned American (Nov 21, 2021)

Donald H said:


> In the eyes of visiting Americans to Canada, we are their utopia!


HaHaHa, Only those lemmings who are vaxxed, tested and masked can cross the border.  Doesn't seem to be helping your infection rate any at all, eh, duck?  Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Outbreak update - Canada.ca   Yeah, that's some utopia.  Just STFU, duck.  We ain't interested in what you're selling.


----------



## Donald H (Nov 21, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Yeah....drugs you get on the cheap after American companies pay billions to create them......you are proud to be living off the creativity and hard work of American companies....


Multinational corporations.
And much to your dismay, Americans are about to get a few drugs cheaper too. I wouldn't worry about it being very many though.

The American people in the majority *hate affordable pharmas!*

The only possible reason is that *the god* hates them too.


----------



## Concerned American (Nov 21, 2021)

Donald H said:


> The American people in the majority *hate affordable pharmas!*


Linkie, moron?  Keep shoving your head up your ass looking for more lies.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Every single one of them, without exception


Demonstrate this to be true.
Pick 5 basic exercises of a constitutionally protected rights and cite their accompanying federal licensure.
Dollars to doughnuts says you will fail.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You like to deal with make believes Dorothy ?


You failed to address the issue put to you - as per the norm.

For a federal-level universal backhground check to work as it does in Illinois, you would have to obtain a license from the US government to simply own a gun.

How long do you think that would stand in federal court?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 21, 2021)

Donald H said:


> There's very little chance of an intruder and zero chance of me having a gun to shove anywhere.
> More important than that, you're still fully stoked up pissant.


Why does insulting him make you feel better?


----------



## Whodatsaywhodat. (Nov 21, 2021)

Donald H said:


> Request denied.
> 
> In the eyes of visiting Americans to Canada, we are their utopia! They come to Canada to lower their blood pressure and stock up on pharmaceuticals. Insulin sales are through the roof!


Yes, as they turn around and head right back to U.S.A.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> For a federal-level universal backhground check to work as it does in Illinois, you would have to obtain a license from the US government to simply own a gun.


Wrong. You don’t need a federal license to buy TNT, an automobile or a plethora of other federally regulated items. You need to buy them from  or be licensed by a regulated state or franchised agency that  meets  minimum federal guidelines. Just ask any FFL dealer or licensed car dealer. The states are free then to make them more stringent as they do now with the federal firearms act. If FOID permits or CC licenses issued by a state meets the minimum federal guidelines for being issued, it would be enough to comply.
Seriously, you do get that literally every interstate transaction is federally regulated but many of the actual agencies that enforce them are the states.

You  can still have licenses issued by states but under minimal  federal guidelines. You guys are so funny.


M14 Shooter said:


> Demonstrate this to be true.
> Pick 5 basic exercises of a constitutionally protected rights and cite their accompanying federal licensure.
> Dollars to doughnuts says you will fail.


You‘re  a child asking a foolish question. You think that the federal requirements for interstate trucking along with shipping has not passed the muster of the constitution ? How about the federal firearms act ? Or, You think the FAA mandates and restrictions on firearms instituted by 911 may not be constitutionally legal. You’re a child. Until challenged and changed, they are all the law of the land. Why don’t you  just. Do your own research for amendments that cover any federally regulated enterprise. It’s easy to do. Move on 

Geesus, the constitution provides access to shorelines in fresh and salt water in every state in the Union Too
You live a very sheltered life. State constitutions are all written to be in compliance with the US constitution. Otherwise, the Fed will take them to court.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 21, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Wrong. You don’t need a federal license to buy TNT, an automobile or a plethora of other federally regulated items. You need to buy them from  or be licensed by a regulated state or franchised agency that  meets  minimum federal guidelines. Just ask any FFL dealer.  The states are free then to make them more stringent as they do now with the federal firearms act. If FOID permits or CC licenses issued by a state meets the minimum federal guidelines for being issued, it would be enough to comply.





Dagosa said:


> Seriously, you do get that literally every interstate transaction is federally regulated but many of the actual agencies that enforce them are the states. Even a long haul trucker drivers license issued by the state of origin is accepted in ever state in the union. Why don’t you look up why instead of having me explain the facts of life to you.
> 
> You  can still have licenses issued by states but under minimal  federal guidelines. You guys are so funny.
> 
> You‘re  a child asking a foolish question. You think that the federal requirements for interstate trucking along with shipping has not passed the muster of the constitution ? How about the federal firearms act ? Or, You think the FAA mandates and restrictions on firearms instituted by 911 may not be constitutionally legal. You’re a child. Until challenged and changed, they are all the law of the land. Why don’t you  just. Do your own research for amendments that cover any federally regulated enterprise. It’s easy to do. Move in child.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Wrong. You don’t need a federal license to buy TNT, an automobile or a plethora of other federally regulated items. You need to buy them from  or be licensed by a regulated state or franchised agency that  meets  minimum federal guidelines. Just ask any FFL dealer or licensed car dealer. The states are free then to make them more stringent as they do now with the federal firearms act. If FOID permits or CC licenses issued by a state meets the minimum federal guidelines for being issued, it would be enough to comply.
> Seriously, you do get that literally every interstate transaction is federally regulated but many of the actual agencies that enforce them are the states.
> 
> You  can still have licenses issued by states but under minimal  federal guidelines. You guys are so funny.
> ...




Come on....you are actually Bulldog with a different name......right?   He was fixated on background checks just like you...but called out on them because like him/her, you guys just want gun registration.....


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Why are you introducing a red herring ? You have to pay for your driver’s license too. Weren’t we talking about BC s. Btw, I’ve had a CC for decades and willing pay to have it renewed. No dealer has ever asked to see it when I’ve legally purchased a firearm. It’s a non item. Find something else to whine about.


Driving is not a guaranteed right.

And if a licensed dealer never asked you for ID then you didn't buy a firearm legally.

In fact I'll wager you never bought one ever.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Driving is not a guaranteed right.
> 
> And if a licensed dealer never asked you for ID then you didn't buy a firearm legally.
> 
> In fact I'll wager you never bought one ever.


Oh, all of a sudden you’re a lawyer now. What a rediculous statement. Access to public highways is a guaranteed right under the constitution.


Blues Man said:


> Driving is not a guaranteed right.
> 
> And if a licensed dealer never asked you for ID then you didn't buy a firearm legally.
> 
> In fact I'll wager you never bought one ever.


I see you didn’t read my post accurately.
ACCESS  to all public ways and facilities is a guaranteed  right. But these rights are not absolute. Licensing is a way the the regulatory institutions, predominantly the states, have of controlling these regulated rights . You are Pretending you know what you are talking about by voicing trite little sayings from Tucker and Fix News.
You babble about what ID is acceptable  to an FFL dealer is lame too. You’re now conflating IDs 

They are regulated as to what is acceptable.

Lastly, you’d lose that bet many times over. I don’t have to brag about my experience with firearms And federal regulations. Already I’ve shown I know much more then most gun a holics. Most of you with a few exceptions need constant correcting. When  I commented on my having a valid state issued concealed carry permit which does serve as at least one acceptable form of ID to most vendors, I guess you figured I just used my card to scare people and never owned a firearm. Hilarious.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Oh, all of a sudden you’re a lawyer now. What a rediculous statement. Access to public highways is a guaranteed right under the constitution.
> 
> I see you didn’t read my post accurately.
> ACCESS  to all public ways and facilities is a guaranteed  right. But these rights are not absolute. Licensing is a way the the regulatory institutions, predominantly the states, have of controlling these regulated rights . You are Pretending you know what you are talking about by voicing trite little sayings from Tucker and Fix News.
> ...


Really?

What part of the Constitution mentions driving?

Driving is a privilege granted by the state you live in and that privilege can be revoked at any time for a variety of reasons









						Do You Need a Driver's License to Legally Operate a Car on Public Roads?
					

Despite what you may read on social media, you still need a driver's license to legally drive a car, and the U.S. Supreme Court hasn't ruled otherwise.




					www.snopes.com


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Come on....you are actually Bulldog with a different name......right?   He was fixated on background checks just like you...but called out on them because like him/her, you guys just want gun registration.....


Huh ? What a BS red herring. States that have required universal BCs  already to buy and sell firearms . Which ones also require firearm registration ? Geesus, is there  any FFL dealer that turns the firearm registration material into a national gun  registry ? Try answer that….

Only for some federally regulated firearms is that the case . So you’re FOS.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> What part of the Constitution mentions driving?


What part of the constitution mentions machine guns, shot guns or even firearms ? Huh ?


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> What part of the constitution mentions machine guns, shot guns or even firearms ? Huh ?


The Second amendment clearly mentions arms.
Arms collectively means any weapon for offense or defense.

That includes firearms

Are you really that fucking STUPID?


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> The Second amendment clearly mentions arms.
> Arms collectively means any weapon for offense or defense.
> 
> That includes firearms
> ...


And driving clearly implies access to public ways.
Are you really that Fking stupid ?
Clearly access to public ways and places of assembly is guaranteed under the constitution. Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution -- Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Really?
> 
> What part of the Constitution mentions driving?
> 
> ...


Wrong. You’re access to public ways is guaranteed under the 14 th amendment. You are using a red herring. You can still walk, ride a bike where allowed, take a bus etc and no one can stop you. The driving  of a car restricted by a license doesn’t prevent you from using a public way.

The  license and BC  is a way of qualifying bearing arms  just like the license to carry a firearm qualifies your right of firearm possession and the license to drive qualifies your right to access public ways. . There is no deference. The right to bear arms has to be defined because “ arms” doesn’t explicitly say firearms. The courts had to do that. They EXCLUDED SHOULDER FIRED RPGs . Doooofus.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Really?
> 
> What part of the Constitution mentions driving?
> 
> ...


Btw, thanks for putting a reference down that supports everything I’ve said. You still need a license to drive a car but not to access public ways in other means.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Wrong.


You said UBC works in Illinois
It works because you need a state license to worn a gun.
So, with Illinois as the model you chose, for UBC to work at the national level you'd nee a federal license to buy a gun.
How long do you think that would stand in federal court?


Dagosa said:


> You‘re  a child asking a foolish question


A question you cannot answer because you know your statement is a lie.
Disagree?
Pick 5 basic exercises of a constitutionally protected rights and cite their accompanying federal licensure.
Dollars to doughnuts says you will, again, fail.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Oh, all of a sudden you’re a lawyer now. What a rediculous statement. Access to public highways is a guaranteed right under the constitution.


That's right.
There's no state or federal license required to travel, not can there be.
So there's -one- right that disproves your claim.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2021)




----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> That's right.
> There's no state or federal license required to travel, not can there be.
> So there's -one- right that disproves your claim.


Have no idea what you’re trying to say. You must have a reading problem. Ah, you don’t need a license to use a public way. You do not have any right to use a public way ( roads)  in a private motor vehicle in general unlicense because your right to use a public way is not absolute. No different then firearm possession. It’s not absolute. It’s regulated. Case closed before you embarrass yourself anymore.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> That's right.
> There's no state or federal license required to travel, not can there be.
> So there's -one- right that disproves your claim.


???
Public ways are guaranteed access to any citizen. It’s the operation of a standard motor vehicle on a public way that requires a licenses. Public access is constitutionally guaranteed to any public domain. But they are all rights and they are  regulated because none of your rights are absolute.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 22, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Have no idea what you’re trying to say.


Because you choose not to.
Thank you for making it clear i need waste no more time on you.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> You said UBC works in Illinois
> It works because you need a state license to worn a gun.
> So, with Illinois as the model you chose, for UBC to work at the national level you'd nee a federal license to buy a gun.
> How long do you think that would stand in federal court?
> ...


No I did not say that that at all. You need to quote me instead of making up stuff. You seem confused . UBC for purchase of firearms and ammo DO NOT require a carry license. You do that with a FOID If you don’t have a permit.

You’re  funny asking the question about federal court adjudication.  you’re  not an arm chair SC expert. We only know what’s  lawful now.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> question you cannot answer because you know your statement is a lie.
> Disagree?
> Pick 5 basic exercises of a constitutionally protected rights and cite their accompanying federal licensure.
> Dollars to doughnuts says you will, again, fail.


You can read can you. I did already.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 22, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> There's no state or federal license required to travel, not can there be.


You make these completely off your head comments that have no basis in fact.
What do you think a passport is if it isn’t a required federally supported “license” to travel abroad in accordance with the FAA  or passage through federal controlled borders. It’s a required document that allows you to practice your right of free passage on public controlled and regulated ways, just like a car license does for inta and interstate travel in an auto you decide to drive. The Feds through the states control a plethora of licenses and passage documents  to practice your rights…..all regulated.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 23, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> And driving clearly implies access to public ways.
> Are you really that Fking stupid ?
> Clearly access to public ways and places of assembly is guaranteed under the constitution. Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution -- Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection


There is no right to drive a car.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 23, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> There is no right to drive a car.


Correct.
There -is-  a right to travel; the state cannot require a license for this.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 23, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> There is no right to drive a car.


Who said there was. That’s part of the regulation to your right of access. The right you have is access to public ways. What part of that don’t you understand. Your access is highly regulated. That along with all your rights in the bill of rights is regulated. That includes requiring, licensed and registered  vehicles. It’s also the federal state and local regulation of firearms. There is not one square foot of territory in the United states where firearms are not regulated……not one.

just like it’s a privilege to operate a private vehicle on a public way because autos are tightly regulated, it’s a privilege to possess a full auto firearm. You need a license, registration and BCs to transfer them.


Sorry you're unaware . There are thousands of full autos in the public domain ,  yet few are used in gun crimes. 
.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 23, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> Who said there was. That’s part of the regulation to your right of access. The right you have is access to public ways. What part of that don’t you understand. Your access is highly regulated. That along with all your rights in the bill of rights is regulated. That includes requiring, licensed and registered  vehicles. It’s also the federal state and local regulation of firearms. There is not one square foot of territory in the United states where firearms are not regulated……not one.
> 
> just like it’s a privilege to operate a private vehicle on a public way because autos are tightly regulated, it’s a privilege to possess a full auto firearm. You need a license, registration and BCs to transfer them.
> 
> ...


Go ahead and try to ride a horse or a bicycle on a federal interstate and see what happens.

And it's not a privilege to possess an automatic rifle anyone who can legally buy any other firearm can legally buy an automatic rifle as long as that can pay the extra tax.









						Automatic weapons are legal, but it takes a lot to get one of the 630,000 in the U.S.
					

When most people think of machine guns, they think of war zones and gangster movies. For some enthusiasts though, they're collectors items – albeit expensive and hard to get. That's because machine guns are governed by legislation from a bygone era, one of the last vestiges of stringent federal...




					www.boisestatepublicradio.org
				




So stop pretending you know anything about gun laws.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 23, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Go ahead and try to ride a horse or a bicycle on a federal interstate and see what happens.
> 
> And it's not a privilege to possess an automatic rifle anyone who can legally buy any other firearm can legally buy an automatic rifle as long as that can pay the extra tax.
> 
> ...


What a dofus. Automobiles are legal too, but highly regulated. You seem to know little about auto registration. Did mommy drive you to school today ?  Oh, a reading lesson. When someone talks about driving regulations, it doesn’t mean that is the only means that are regulated. You guys will do anything to feel right about something, even make up sht. 

it’s not a right to own a full auto rifle. The federal firearms act indicates the exceptions to accepted normal self defense arms. . You didn’t know that an “ act” is a constitutional subscript did you. They and other implements are regulated. Why don’t you read the Heller decision, this time for understanding. It’s amazing how misinformed you guys are.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 23, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> What a dofus. Automobiles are legal too, but highly regulated. You seem to know little about auto registration. Did mommy drive you to school today ?
> 
> it’s not a right to own a full auto rifle. The federal firearms act says so. You didn’t know that an “ act” is a constitutional subscript did you. They and other implements are regulated. Why don’t you read the Heller decision, this time for understanding. It’s amazing how misinformed you guys are.


Automobiles aren't highly regulated.

Literally anyone can buy one.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 23, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> And it's not a privilege to possess an automatic rifle anyone who can legally buy any other firearm can legally buy an automatic rifle as long as that can pay the extra tax.


Under federal law, machine-guns are shall-issue.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 23, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> Under federal law, machine-guns are shall-issue.


Exactly.

Anyone who can pay the extra tax can get one.

The only limitation is that the general public can't buy one manufactured after some date I don't feel like looking up right now.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Nov 23, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Exactly.
> Anyone who can pay the extra tax can get one.
> The only limitation is that the general public can't buy one manufactured after some date I don't feel like looking up right now.


May 1986.
And its registered, not manufactured -- if you find a WW2 MP-40 that's not registered with the BATFE, you cannot register it.


----------



## Dagosa (Nov 23, 2021)

Blues Man said:


> Automobiles aren't highly regulated.
> 
> Literally anyone can buy one.


You can’t be serious. That is crazy. Like you do a car,  Do you have to register your fire arm available for national reference by every law enforce the agency in the  country, and,  reregister it every year and pay a tax in ownership pass a written AND OPERATING test to operate ? Do they set up road blocks looking for anyone impaired and carrying a gun at the same time.
Automobiles and driver qualification are much more regulated  then firearms and their owners.
A cop can have you car taken and confiscated  if you  engage in a bunch of civil offenses, let alone criminal.  Now apologize for such a miss statement. Auto ownership or operation  is very highly regulated.

Go ahead, drive around with illegal tags on your auto and an expired license….or on3 that pollutes. We never talked about the regulations for repair,inspection and pollution.


----------



## Blues Man (Nov 23, 2021)

Dagosa said:


> You can’t be serious. That is crazy. Like you do a car,  Do you have to register your fire arm available for national reference by every law enforce the agency in the  country, and,  reregister it every year and pay a tax in ownership pass a written AND OPERATING test to operate ? Do they set up road blocks looking for anyone impaired and carrying a gun at the same time.
> Automobiles and driver qualification are much more regulated  then firearms and their owners.
> A cop can have you car taken and confiscated  if you  engage in a bunch of civil offenses, let alone criminal.  Now apologize for such a miss statement. Auto ownership or operation  is very highly regulated.


I don't have to register a car.

I can buy any car I want and never register or insure it.

Do you know when you need to register and insure a car?

only when you plan on driving it on state roads that's when.


----------



## Ringo (Dec 2, 2021)

Crossbow!


----------



## Flash (Dec 2, 2021)

mudwhistle said:


> Best thing I know for home defense is a 12 gauge with a light so you just point and shoot. Put the light where you want it to go. I'd use birdshot....#4 or #7. The main thing is stopping power without too much penetration.




At close range bird shot can kill but probably won't.  It will sure as hell take the fight out of somebody.


----------



## Flash (Dec 2, 2021)

Tax Man said:


> Try your fist as it is attached and needs not ammo. It works for me.




Yea, right.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Dec 2, 2021)

Tax Man said:


> Try your fist as it is attached and needs not ammo. It works for me.


Oh look - internet tough guy # 236,453,232


----------



## mudwhistle (Dec 2, 2021)

Tax Man said:


> Try your fist as it is attached and needs not ammo. It works for me.


Actually....a nice softball bat works more effectively.


----------



## mudwhistle (Dec 2, 2021)

M14 Shooter said:


> Oh look - internet tough guy # 236,453,232


Some of these people have never been mugged or held up....and they need to learn what it's like the hard way.


----------

