Bikes and guns

[whoaru99]

Originally Posted by pacomutt

Anyone remember "Black Talons"? They will ruin your whole day!

Yeah, I still have a couple boxes in .45 ACP.

I'll never load them for self defense though. Not that they're any more deadly than the rounds you can get today, but some lawyer would have a heyday trying to paint you as solely intent on death and destruction for using them based on the old (but false) stigma the carry.

[Romans5.8]

Originally Posted by whoaru99

Yeah, I still have a couple boxes in .45 ACP.

I'll never load them for self defense though. Not that they're any more deadly than the rounds you can get today, but some lawyer would have a heyday trying to paint you as solely intent on death and destruction for using them based on the old (but false) stigma the carry.

Your exactly right. Lots of conceal carry defense attorneys and instructors alike will tell you to NEVER use a single action weapon OR cock a hammer. These can be seen by zealous prosecutors as "agressive" and somehow call it not defense. "You had time to cock the hammer" or "the defendant slowly cocked the hammer and proceeded to execute the poor victim who had a accidentally broken into his home". You know they can twist things!

My grandpa used to own a gun store (before I was born!). He kept an old .44 special in his cash drawer. The first round was a light hand load with a full metal jacket round. If you are going to survive it, it'll be that round as it'll be through-and-through. The other 5 were the hottest loads he could handle with hollow point rounds. A police officer (they al bought their ammo there) that he was better off with JUST the hollow point rounds, as again the two different loadings could seem agressive or intentional.

He was robbed once, and he did draw his weapon once. But, there was also a police officer in the building getting ammo for his service pistol who fired before he got a chance to! Guess it worked out okay for my grandpa then! Lol.

[carthadys]

I am a big advocate of hollow point ammunition. My understanding of the law as it stands is that if you fire more than one round they can get you on the hook for excessive force. If I have to put someone down better make sure they stay down on the first shot.
It's a hard transition after having military training. Two to the chest and one to the head.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com App

[Romans5.8]

Originally Posted by carthadys

I am a big advocate of hollow point ammunition. My understanding of the law as it stands is that if you fire more than one round they can get you on the hook for excessive force. If I have to put someone down better make sure they stay down on the first shot.
It's a hard transition after having military training. Two to the chest and one to the head.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com App

Oddly, most police officers are trained to continue firing until the subject is on the ground. But you are right. You always hear about how "9 shots isn't self defense". But the fact is, a fatal shot to the chest gives a few seconds for an armed assailant to take a last stand. That's why a police officer will fire until they are on the ground, so they won't return fire or harm a civilian.

[carthadys]

Originally Posted by Romans5.8

Oddly, most police officers are trained to continue firing until the subject is on the ground. But you are right. You always hear about how "9 shots isn't self defense". But the fact is, a fatal shot to the chest gives a few seconds for an armed assailant to take a last stand. That's why a police officer will fire until they are on the ground, so they won't return fire or harm a civilian.

For police officers yes I can believe that. But the legal part of my conceal carry class had a big focus on not firing excessive rounds. Ideally no more than two or three but the way the criminal and civil laws are written right now they could get you on tap for excessive force.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com App

[Cheesefood]

The only issue I see...and I'm assuming none of you have probably ever exchanged gunfire...is that most people don't want to die and wouldn't rather die or risk serious injury instead of go to jail. If you have a gun pointed at you, the safe thing to do is to assume it's loaded. Most people have an instinct that tells them to stay alive.

Now, maybe there are a few guys out there who are willing to die for your TV. First assumption is that they're going to kill you regardless. I don't think that's the case, as life in prison isn't worth your TV either.

In reality, the gun itself is a deterrent, as is the potential outcomes:

1. Get killed
2. Get really hurt
3. Commit aggravated battery / attempted murder, probably get caught, go to jail.
4. Commit murder
5. Any mix of the above
6. None of the above
7. Walk away

If I merely point my gun at someone, they'll throw hands-up and/or run away. In that case, owning ammo would have made no difference.

If they reach for their gun they're hoping that, at close range, they're faster at retrieving their weapon and firing it accurately before me (who already has weapon drawn and aimed). If they know they're a faster, better aim and can kill me before I can, than owning ammo would have a small benefit but chances are I might lose because I'm facing someone with Navy Seals skills.

If they draw first and I pull out a piece I'm losing because I was not in the Navy, a SEAL, nor am I exceptionally fast. I'm a pretty good aim for a non-owner. Hell, even if I were 99% better I'm not winning that match.

If we're both already drawn upon meeting, my mind is better for survival than my ammo. If I fire, I could miss or he could also fire and one or both of us lose. More likely we'll figure out an agreement to walk away unhurt. Ammo would have some benefit here in case I wanted to take a large risk, but my chances of survival are just as good without ammo.


So owning a gun has an advantage, yes. Owning ammo has a small advantage. It's based on the assumption that Hollywood style drama will ensue and their will be an exchange of fire.

[BigDog]

Cheese.. well said.... BUT!!! the gun and the ammo are useless alone! And people get killed everyday over 50 bucks

[Cyclesarge]

Originally Posted by Cheesefood

The only issue I see...and I'm assuming none of you have probably ever exchanged gunfire...is that most people don't want to die and wouldn't rather die or risk serious injury instead of go to jail. If you have a gun pointed at you, the safe thing to do is to assume it's loaded. Most people have an instinct that tells them to stay alive.

Now, maybe there are a few guys out there who are willing to die for your TV. First assumption is that they're going to kill you regardless. I don't think that's the case, as life in prison isn't worth your TV either.

In reality, the gun itself is a deterrent, as is the potential outcomes:

1. Get killed
2. Get really hurt
3. Commit aggravated battery / attempted murder, probably get caught, go to jail.
4. Commit murder
5. Any mix of the above
6. None of the above
7. Walk away

If I merely point my gun at someone, they'll throw hands-up and/or run away. In that case, owning ammo would have made no difference.

If they reach for their gun they're hoping that, at close range, they're faster at retrieving their weapon and firing it accurately before me (who already has weapon drawn and aimed). If they know they're a faster, better aim and can kill me before I can, than owning ammo would have a small benefit but chances are I might lose because I'm facing someone with Navy Seals skills.

If they draw first and I pull out a piece I'm losing because I was not in the Navy, a SEAL, nor am I exceptionally fast. I'm a pretty good aim for a non-owner. Hell, even if I were 99% better I'm not winning that match.

If we're both already drawn upon meeting, my mind is better for survival than my ammo. If I fire, I could miss or he could also fire and one or both of us lose. More likely we'll figure out an agreement to walk away unhurt. Ammo would have some benefit here in case I wanted to take a large risk, but my chances of survival are just as good without ammo.


So owning a gun has an advantage, yes. Owning ammo has a small advantage. It's based on the assumption that Hollywood style drama will ensue and their will be an exchange of fire.

You've obviously never dealt with a tweaker or anyone ballsy enough to break into your home, knowing that you can legally SHOOT them just for doing that, and decided to do it anyway. The problem with the logic of many law abiding citizens is that they think like law abiding citizens which is worlds apart from the thinking of people that would just as soon kill you rather than having to fight you in a court of law.

Recently here in quiet old Eugene, two guys decided to rob a coffee stand at gun point. The barista drew his Glock and they started shooting at each other. One guy ran off, while still shooting at the coffee stand. The other guy stayed and fought, even though initially he had cover and was safe from the barista, he ended up being killed. The coffee stand employee DEFINITELY would have been killed if he was not capable of returning fire.

Mostly I would say (like any competent firearm instructor) if you don't intend to use a weapon when it comes time, don't own that weapon. If you DO choose to buy the weapon, buy the ammo and learn how to use the weapon, that way YOU have the option whether you use it or not.

[Cheesefood]

Originally Posted by Cyclesarge

You've obviously never dealt with a tweaker or anyone ballsy enough to break into your home, knowing that you can legally SHOOT them just for doing that, and decided to do it anyway. The problem with the logic of many law abiding citizens is that they think like law abiding citizens which is worlds apart from the thinking of people that would just as soon kill you rather than having to fight you in a court of law.

So someone breaks into your house at night. Their goal is to not wake you, get the stuff and get out. Advantage might not be in your favor - by the time you get your gun, get acclimated to the dark and awake enough to be aware the robber will either hear you and flea or aim. Locking your door, standing nearby with a baseball bat and calling the cops has a better outcome than firing at him.

Originally Posted by Cyclesarge

Recently here in quiet old Eugene, two guys decided to rob a coffee stand at gun point. The barista drew his Glock and they started shooting at each other. One guy ran off, while still shooting at the coffee stand. The other guy stayed and fought, even though initially he had cover and was safe from the barista, he ended up being killed. The coffee stand employee DEFINITELY would have been killed if he was not capable of returning fire.

Or, had he never drawn, would have never been in that situation. He could have easily lost the gun fight.

Originally Posted by Cyclesarge

Mostly I would say (like any competent firearm instructor) if you don't intend to use a weapon when it comes time, don't own that weapon. If you DO choose to buy the weapon, buy the ammo and learn how to use the weapon, that way YOU have the option whether you use it or not.

Again, 99% of the time nothing will happen. You're more likely to be killed by someone you know than a total stranger. There are VERY few burglary cases ending in murder of unarmed people (EDIT: Where the house wasn't targeted and murder already expected) - the goal is to get your stuff, not to kill you or anyone else. Homeowners insurance will cover loss. What's the most you could lose, and is that worth killing someone over?

The ammo industry wants you to buy their product so they love to share stories about massive gunfire battles to pump you up about one day being in a gunfire battle. It's no different than cigarette manufacturers wanting you to think their product makes you cool. Ammo makers want you to consume A LOT of their product at ranges in "training" for a battle that'll never happen. First off, most people just couldn't kill a person no matter how much they think they could. Second, most people will be too scared to fire accurately.

Police and military training aside, practicing shooting a gun is just a way to spend money on ammo and gun ranges where they display newer, shinier, bigger guns than you own. Yeah, owning loaded 12 guns makes your house SO MUCH safer than one gun or even a phone and baseball bat. Because when the time comes you'll be able to use all 12 together, right? Or you'll feel great about your kid pointing a weapon at someone and having one pointed back at them.

You're sold the fear of the drug induced black male gang member peforming a random break-in for the worthless junk in your living room, and then sold huge guns as a means to protect you from the black man. Then, lots of pretty ammo - because someone will make a decision to be hit based on what type of ammo you're using. Or they'll take the time to notice that your gun is a different brand and size than theirs. Here's a hint: getting shot by a tiny gun loaded with cheap ammo kills you just as quick as a bigger gun with the most expensive ammo.

[Cheesefood]

Originally Posted by BigDog

Cheese.. well said.... BUT!!! the gun and the ammo are useless alone!

Ammo itself does nothing. Gun by itself is pretty useful.

Originally Posted by BigDog

And people get killed everyday over 50 bucks

You're not going to see someone waiving a gun at you from 100 feet away. If you get mugged you're suddenly going to feel a gun in your back or have a gun pointed at you at close range. Again, if you're a Navy SEAL then you know how to pull out a gun and fire and hit a man who's already got a gun pointed at you at close range. The rest of us don't stand a chance and are better off not challenging the nice man who can kill us at any time but hasn't so far.