Elderly store own blasts armed robber

Anyone else notice that the store clerk didn't need an AR-15 to stop the robbers? He used a good old shotgun, and that was more than enough to send the robbers packing. To the best of my knowledge, shotguns have never been on the table for being banned, just AR-15's. For you people that say shotguns are insufficient for defending your home or property, this video says otherwise. Not only did it seriously injure the robber who first walked in, but the injuries were enough to deter the other robbers from entering the store.

Okay, but what if they did all walk into the store at once?

 
So?

You're not making the point you think you're making.

A lot of gun nuts on here say that AR-15's are needed for home/personal defense because other guns aren't effective. Looks to me like a shotgun was pretty damned effective at stopping the robbery.

Okay, but what if they did all walk into the store at once?


Most shotguns have 2 or more rounds that can be fired. If it's a pump shotgun, you can fire several rounds before needing to reload. And, even if they all did walk into the store at once, a shotgun has a larger field of fire than an AR-15, meaning that in an enclosed space like the store, he could have injured more than one robber with one shotgun blast. No, you don't have to have an AR-15 for home/personal defense, shotguns work quite well.
 
A lot of gun nuts on here say that AR-15's are needed for home/personal defense because other guns aren't effective. Looks to me like a shotgun was pretty damned effective at stopping the robbery.



Most shotguns have 2 or more rounds that can be fired. If it's a pump shotgun, you can fire several rounds before needing to reload. And, even if they all did walk into the store at once, a shotgun has a larger field of fire than an AR-15, meaning that in an enclosed space like the store, he could have injured more than one robber with one shotgun blast. No, you don't have to have an AR-15 for home/personal defense, shotguns work quite well.

I never said you had to have anything. People have preferences of the weapon they wish to have in the event they need one for self-defense. It should be their choice, not the government.
 
I never said you had to have anything. People have preferences of the weapon they wish to have in the event they need one for self-defense. It should be their choice, not the government.

I said "a lot of gun nuts on here", not you specifically. Are you including yourself in with all the gun nuts on here?
 
My 100 pound wife has a hard time shouldering a 12 gauge.

I don't give a rat fuck what your uninformed ass thinks we NEED. It's a bill of RIGHTS not needs.

I didn't specify what you do or don't need, I said that a lot of the gun nuts on here think an AR15 is needed because they aren't as effective as other weapons. And, sorry, but there are other types of weapons out there which are just as, if not more so effective as an AR-15. My personal choice of weapon for home defense is a 40 cal. semi automatic handgun. Doesn't have much kick, has a lot of stopping power, and can be used in more places than an AR15 can, because it's a handgun and not a rifle. Requires less space to move around with, and can have up to 15 rounds in it.
 
And, sorry, but there are other types of weapons out there which are just as, if not more so effective as an AR-15.
List them and I will take a look.

I need (for the wife) a flexible weapon platform with 4 points of contact, a medium-round (between pistol and long rifle) that shoots semi-auto with enough bullets in one magazine to not require a reload in the dark with multiple armed invaders attacking(40 rounds).

Please list the weapons that qualify that are better than the AR platform.

I will wait.
 
Biden can't take a shower or ride a bike without hurting himself. Do you know what a ban means? It means you can no longer buy a firearm of your choice. Yes, that's taking your guns away. Do you know what happens when you can't get parts to fix your gun? It means the weapon is useless like having no gun at all.

Perhaps "they" should take my guns away because "they" think I'm paranoid. Government doesn't have that kind of power. It's unconstitutional. I know you on the left hate the document but it's still the law of the land. And if the Communists did have that kind of power, they would judge everybody as incapable of owning a weapon. This was suggested by Biden in his gun confiscation plan. You have to have a federal license to own a gun. That would require seeing a shrink for $800.00. It would also include the shrink interviewing your family members, friends, coworkers, even ex girlfriends or spouses.

If you really want to live in a place where the public is disarmed, try North Korea. They would welcome you with open arms.
If you believe regulation is the same as confiscation, we have nothing to discuss. There is no shortage of online dictionaries for your education.
 
If you believe regulation is the same as confiscation, we have nothing to discuss. There is no shortage of online dictionaries for your education.

So what would you call it if they made law you have to get a federal firearms license which they won't give you? That would make you a criminal for being a gun owner. And how would they be able to enforce a law with no penalties like heavy fines or jail time?
 
I didn't specify what you do or don't need, I said that a lot of the gun nuts on here think an AR15 is needed because they aren't as effective as other weapons. And, sorry, but there are other types of weapons out there which are just as, if not more so effective as an AR-15.

Fair enough. Then what's the point of a ban?

Well I'll give you their game plan before they go forward with it: They ban rifles like the AR, and mass shooters start to use guns like you described. Their next agenda will be to point that out to people, and move to having all semi-automatic guns banned as well since many of them can inflict the same damage as an AR.
 
Fair enough. Then what's the point of a ban?

Well I'll give you their game plan before they go forward with it: They ban rifles like the AR, and mass shooters start to use guns like you described. Their next agenda will be to point that out to people, and move to having all semi-automatic guns banned as well since many of them can inflict the same damage as an AR.
The only thing that we haven't tried is to repeal all gun laws. We should do that before we do anything else.
 
I said "a lot of gun nuts on here", not you specifically. Are you including yourself in with all the gun nuts on here?

Depends on how you define a gun nut. A person that fancies weapons is not a nut no more than a person that fancies classic cars like Jay Leno, or a person that fancies guitars like Peter Frampton. I only own two guns, my semi-automatic 9mm and my .357 revolver. The .357 is too heavy and too hard to carry in public. That's why I have the 9mm. It's small, light and has an 18 round magazine.
 
Depends on how you define a gun nut. A person that fancies weapons is not a nut no more than a person that fancies classic cars like Jay Leno, or a person that fancies guitars like Peter Frampton. I only own two guns, my semi-automatic 9mm and my .357 revolver. The .357 is too heavy and too hard to carry in public. That's why I have the 9mm. It's small, light and has an 18 round magazine.
Amy I a gun-guitar-car nut? I have many of each!
:laugh:
 
List them and I will take a look.

I need (for the wife) a flexible weapon platform with 4 points of contact, a medium-round (between pistol and long rifle) that shoots semi-auto with enough bullets in one magazine to not require a reload in the dark with multiple armed invaders attacking(40 rounds).

Please list the weapons that qualify that are better than the AR platform.

I will wait.

A 40 cal handgun is semi automatic, doesn't have much in the way of recoil, is fairly easy to handle, and carries 15 rounds (16 if you keep one in the chamber). You said your wife needs 40 rounds in case of multiple armed invaders? What kind of neighborhood do you live in, or is your wife that poor of a shot? 40 rounds? Even if you had to take 5 rounds to hit 1 person (and again, that says you need more time at the range if that is the case), you would have ammo for 8 intruders. Most intruders that do home invasions are only 1 or 2 people, 4 if they are going after a large house (but a group of 4 or more is rare).
 
Apparently nearly taking his arm off?

Homeboy ran off screaming,”he shot my arm off!”

Looked to be a whole gang ready to do the armed robbery.




It‘s California though, I’m sure once he is out of the hospital he’ll be out on bail.


CA is a communist shithole run by schizophrenics
 
A 40 cal handgun is semi automatic
4 points of contact?

Look, if you don't know what you're talking about, that's OK. Just admit it.
You said your wife needs 40 rounds in case of multiple armed invaders? What kind of neighborhood do you live in, or is your wife that poor of a shot? 40 rounds?
Even the most heavily trained miss all over the place in high stress situations like being attacked by 3 to 4 or intruders.

Look, it's obviously that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I'll just leave it at that.
 
4 points of contact?

Look, if you don't know what you're talking about, that's OK. Just admit it.

Even the most heavily trained miss all over the place in high stress situations like being attacked by 3 to 4 or intruders.

Look, it's obviously that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I'll just leave it at that.
Come one now, gAyBikerSailor was a pencil pusher in the Navy.
 

Forum List

Back
Top