(February 14, 2016 at 1:10 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:Got any proof that I would not learn to shoot faster than I would learn to take down a delusional attacker of twice my size with my own fists?

None whatsoever.  But learning to use a firearm isn't the same as actually using one.

Quote: In the absence of either option being untenable, where police protection is insufficient, then what?

Then nothing.  I'm just pointing out that your argument about a gun being sure fire protection (pun intended) from an unarmed attacker is unsupported.  People panic, they freeze up.  In both instances where I was faced with firearms, I was able to take the weapon away from my attacker and beat each one to something resembling a pulp.  Granted, had they been cool, calm and collected, they could have dropped me like a bad habit.  But they weren't and they didn't.

Quote:Oh, then why would the real-life physical bully who bullies people all over this forum as well give a shit about equalizing our society anyway? It's not even "our" society, with you being the non-American who just has to throw his weight at a society which he knows so little of.

If you're intimating that I am - or ever have been - a bully, you're grossly mistaken.  If I take the rest of your comment correctly, I'm not attempting to change the American gun culture, merely pointing out the flaws of a system where very nearly anyone who wants one can acquire a firearm with little or no training or safety precautions, and the specious reasons for being allowed to do so.

For what it's worth, there is a LOT of private gun ownership in New Zealand, yet our gun-related deaths are miniscule compared to those in the US.

Boru

You tend to be rather blunt with people here at times - that's all I can honestly say on that, but then I suppose I am too sometimes.

I'm in favor of permitting gun ownership, and concealed carry for any American (and anyone in the world, don't see a good reason not to), provided that they undergo a standard and effective training course which deals not only with safe handling, shooting accuracy, and legal education, but also simulated situations which many police training programs use. This may sound like a bit much for the average citizen, but it's probably necessary in order to ensure that the gun actually makes people more safe than vulnerable. It would at least provide the option available to all which they deserve in a civil society, not just for those belonging to the elite club of military personnel and law enforcement officials, especially where the latter are either running rampant with abuse or are just plain absent where they would be theoretically useful. Also, while I generally dislike the privatization of government functions, in this case allowing the administration of training by regulated private enterprise would speed up the process for permit applicants, so that nobody would have to wait a year or more in order to get their training started. It wouldn't hurt the economy in any way either.

Quote:I'm in favor of permitting gun ownership, and concealed carry for any American (and anyone in the world, don't see a good reason not to), provided that they undergo a standard and effective training course which deals not only with safe handling, shooting accuracy, and legal education, but also simulated situations which many police training programs use. This may sound like a bit much for the average citizen, but it's probably necessary in order to ensure that the gun actually makes people more safe than vulnerable. It would at least provide the option available to all which they deserve in a civil society, not just for those belonging to the elite club of military personnel and law enforcement officials, especially where the latter are either running rampant with abuse or are just plain absent where they would be theoretically useful. Also, while I generally dislike the privatization of government functions, in this case allowing the administration of training by regulated private enterprise would speed up the process for permit applicants, so that nobody would have to wait a year or more in order to get their training started. It wouldn't hurt the economy in any way either.

How would you feel about a restriction that requires you to keep any firearms - unloaded - under lock and key, and to have your arrangements inspected at random by the local police?  Bear in mind that if your gun safe is found to be unlocked (or your weapons loaded, or your guns and ammo stored in the same place), you will lose your firearm permit.  Because that is exactly the arrangement here, and no one - as far as I know - has found it to be objectionable.

Boru

(February 14, 2016 at 1:54 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: How would you feel about a restriction that requires you to keep any firearms - unloaded - under lock and key, and to have your arrangements inspected at random by the local police?  Bear in mind that if your gun safe is found to be unlocked (or your weapons loaded, or your guns and ammo stored in the same place), you will lose your firearm permit.  Because that is exactly the arrangement here, and no one - as far as I know - has found it to be objectionable.

Boru

I would not like it. If it were that way here, I would have a staged safe that met their draconian requirements. I would also have many firearms loaded and ready but hidden from them.

(February 14, 2016 at 2:03 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(February 14, 2016 at 1:54 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: How would you feel about a restriction that requires you to keep any firearms - unloaded - under lock and key, and to have your arrangements inspected at random by the local police?  Bear in mind that if your gun safe is found to be unlocked (or your weapons loaded, or your guns and ammo stored in the same place), you will lose your firearm permit.  Because that is exactly the arrangement here, and no one - as far as I know - has found it to be objectionable.

Boru

I would not like it. If it were that way here, I would have a staged safe that met their draconian requirements. I would also have many firearms loaded and ready but hidden from them.

And you'd eventually be caught, fined and jailed. And serve you right, too.

Boru

(February 14, 2016 at 1:54 pm)oddingBoru4 Wrote: How would you feel about a restriction that requires you to keep any firearms - unloaded - under lock and key, and to have your arrangements inspected at random by the local police?  Bear in mind that if your gun safe is found to be unlocked (or your weapons loaded, or your guns and ammo stored in the same place), you will lose your firearm permit.  Because that is exactly the arrangement here, and no one - as far as I know - has found it to be objectionable.

Boru

They're doing that in many US States, although I'm not aware of any such random inspections. The last part sounds particularly creepy to me - there are many good reasons why our Constitution forbids government officials from entering a private home without a warrant! If something goes wrong on account of legal requirements not being followed, then of course you don't want to be that gun owner.

I'm all in favor of gun locks and safe storage where children do not have access to the gun in your home, but there are plenty of good ways for keeping your gun locked up safe. Most homes probably already have a sturdy cabinet which they can put a lock on, so forcing everyone to purchase an extra cabinet with the label "Gun Safe" (if that is what you are describing) would just be abusive. Therefore "Gun Lock" yes, "Gun Safe" no.

Also, there should be no storage requirements in homes where no children live, provided you don't allow guests to bring in their children without such measures in place.

If you have children in your home, and you really are going to use your gun to protect them when you hear footsteps much too heavy to be theirs, following the jimmying of your kitchen window, then you had better be able to have it ready fast. How can you realistically have time then to deal with so many fucking locks?    This would of course render your weapon pointless unless you sleep with it loaded, unlocked, and by your bed! Having your gun safely stored and locked when your kids are playing in the house is all well and good, but it's no good to have the government prohibiting the exercise of sensible judgement.

Every gun owner is a safe gun owner, until they're not safe.

(February 14, 2016 at 2:05 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(February 14, 2016 at 2:03 pm)KUSA Wrote: I would not like it. If it were that way here, I would have a staged safe that met their draconian requirements. I would also have many firearms loaded and ready but hidden from them.

And you'd eventually be caught, fined and jailed. And serve you right, too.

Boru

Yeah because we know that every law breaker always gets caught.

(February 14, 2016 at 2:30 pm)Gawdzilla Wrote: Every gun owner is a safe gun owner, until they're not safe.

Bravo! That was brilliant. Did you think this up all by yourself?

(February 14, 2016 at 4:13 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(February 14, 2016 at 2:05 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: And you'd eventually be caught, fined and jailed.  And serve you right, too.

Boru

Yeah because we know that every law breaker always gets caught.

No, of course they don't, and I never said or implied such a thing. But the odds that you wouldn't get caught with unlicensed guns improperly concealed is (here, at least) so small as to not be worth consideration.

Boru

Training is great but it is hard to predict what people will do when they are scared or angry, we see trained professionals make mistakes with their firearms in different situations.