Whatever. Bad experiences with people?

[Treasure_Hunter]

FYI....Please remember this is not the politics forum so please keep posts non political in nature and thread can continue.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Red James Cash]

Good gold boy.Go with what you like,I personally suggest something in .45 or .357.One from either one will put any man down.Avoid .25, .32.Garbage as manstoppers.

 

[Honest Samuel]

Not everybody who have smart phones are smart.

 

[releventchair]

FYI....Please remember this is not the politics forum so please keep posts non political in nature and thread can continue.

Being shot could be ,but is not likely political in nature.
Until data shows licensed legal citizens while carrying are shot by officers at a higher rate than non legally armed ( or simply unarmed citizens /others), I will object to any suggestion that those who carry legally are in danger of being shot by officers in any increased manner..... simply by carrying.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Being shot could be ,but is not likely political in nature.
Until data shows licensed legal citizens while carrying are shot by officers at a higher rate than non legally armed ( or simply unarmed citizens /others), I will object to any suggestion that those who carry legally are in danger of being shot by officers in any increased manner..... simply by carrying.

Deleted the comment already, my post was just a reminder to keep it non political.

 

[releventchair]

Deleted the comment already, my post was just a reminder to keep it non political.

I' ll do that.

 

[GB1]

Good gold boy.Go with what you like,I personally suggest something in .45 or .357.One from either one will put any man down.Avoid .25, .32.Garbage as manstoppers.

i'll maybe get a 357 but a will probably get me a compact 45 i thought about a 1911 but its a little big to conceal

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

Minimal? You wouldn't state that if someone you loved was in that "minimal" amount. ONE is too many to the vast majority of people in this country.

Minimal. As in statistically rare. And such things have diminished in frequency.

That is not opinion. That is cold, hard fact.

As individuals, you and I are far more likely to die from a myriad of other threats - statistically speaking. Among those threats are medical errors, disease, vehicular accidents, drowning, blunt force trauma (by way of fists and/or feet) and a bunch of other causes that aren't systematically singled out by a media that appears to be hell-bent on dismantling individual freedoms.

Like everybody else in this nation, I have had the experience of losing loved ones. It isn't a rare occurrence as it is, and that will happen with more frequency as I grow older. In the past several years I have lost loved ones to vehicular accidents, medical errors, blunt force trauma (she was strangled) and disease.

Please, save your lecture (I'd want to infringe upon individual rights if I had lost someone) for the gullible. I've been there and I still am not in favor of rights being infringed.

Not mine, not yours, not anyone's. Not even when others really, really, want to enact policies that infringe upon the rights of others.

No doubt you'd be unwilling to discuss how many of your belongings can be taken by force (by someone who covets all of your property). Don't expect me (or others) to be open to discussing how much infringement we'll accept. The answer is zero. It will always be zero. Even when someone really, really wants to strip away freedom: the answer is zero.

 

[Red James Cash]

Gold boy a 1911 is a good bet.Go with a commander or an officers model,both are smaller versions of a full size 1911.I carry a Para Ordnance P12 .45.It can fit in your pants pocket with an inch or two of handle showing.Its modeled after the colt 1911 officers model so much so that colt parts will interchange with the P12.Theres 3different magazines for it,a 10 round 12 round and a 14 round,add another for one in the chamber .

 

[FreeBirdTim]

You come up with that by yourself ,or from a cop?

Nope, YouTube. Here's one for you:

 

[pepperj]

[h=2]Every Day on Average (ages 0-19)[/h][FONT=&quot]Every day, 46 children and teens are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Every day, 7 children and teens die from gun violence:[/FONT]

• 4 are murdered
• 3 die from suicide

[FONT=&quot]Every day, 40 children and teens are shot and survive:[/FONT]

• 31 injured in an attack
• 1 survives a suicide attempt
• 8 shot unintentionally

[FONT=&quot]Every Day on Average (all ages)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Every day, 318 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Every day, 96 people die from gun violence: [/FONT]

• 34 are murdered
• 59 die from suicide
• 1 killed unintentionally
• 1 killed by legal intervention
• 1 died but was intent unknown

[FONT=&quot]Every day, 222 people are shot and survive:[/FONT]

• 164 injured in an attack
• 10 survive a suicide attempt
• 45 shot unintentionally
• 3 are shot in a legal intervention

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[h=2]In One Year on Average (ages 0-19)[/h][FONT=&quot]17,102 American children and teens are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2,737 kids die from gun violence:[/FONT]

• 1,606 murdered
• 958 die from suicide
• 110 killed unintentionally
• 26 killed by legal intervention
• 36 die but intent was unknown

[FONT=&quot]14,365 kids survive gun injuries:[/FONT]

• 11,321 injured in an attack
• 232 survive a suicide attempt
• 2,747 shot unintentionally
• 65 shot in a legal intervention

[FONT=&quot]In America, 1 out of 3 homes with kids have guns and nearly 1.7 million children live in a home with an unlocked, loaded gun. [/FONT]
[h=2]In One Year on Average (all ages)[/h][FONT=&quot]116,255 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]35,141 people die from gun violence[/FONT]

• 12,246 murdered
• 21,637 die from suicide
• 500 killed unintentionally
• 479 killed by legal intervention
• 279 die but intent was unknown

[FONT=&quot]81,114 people survive gun injuries:[/FONT]

• 60,041 injured in an attack
• 3,700 survive a suicide attempt
• 16,428 shot unintentionally
• 945 people are shot by legal intervention

 

[Red James Cash]

Oh boy some mainstream propaganda.

 

[Red James Cash]

https://crimeresearch.org/2018/04/r...un-violence-problem-explained-17-maps-charts/

 

[releventchair]

[h=2]Every Day on Average (ages 0-19)[/h][FONT="]Every day, [B]46 children and teens[/B] are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]Every day, 7 children and teens die from gun violence:[/FONT]

• 4 are murdered
• 3 die from suicide

[FONT="]Every day, [B]40 children and teens[/B] are shot and survive:[/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]31 injured in an attack
[*]1 survives a suicide attempt
[*]8 shot unintentionally
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]Every Day on Average (all ages)[/FONT]
[FONT="]Every day, [B]318 people[/B] in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]Every day, 96 people die from gun violence: [/FONT]

• 34 are murdered
• 59 die from suicide
• 1 killed unintentionally
• 1 killed by legal intervention
• 1 died but was intent unknown

[FONT="]Every day, [B]222 people[/B] are shot and survive:[/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]164 injured in an attack
[*]10 survive a suicide attempt
[*]45 shot unintentionally
[*]3 are shot in a legal intervention
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]
[/FONT]
[h=2]In One Year on Average (ages 0-19)[/h][FONT="][B]17,102 American children and teens[/B] are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]2,737 kids die from gun violence:[/FONT]

• 1,606 murdered
• 958 die from suicide
• 110 killed unintentionally
• 26 killed by legal intervention
• 36 die but intent was unknown

[FONT="][B]14,365 kids[/B] survive gun injuries:[/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]11,321 injured in an attack
[*]232 survive a suicide attempt
[*]2,747 shot unintentionally
[*]65 shot in a legal intervention
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]In America, 1 out of 3 homes with kids have guns and nearly 1.7 million children live in a home with an unlocked, loaded gun. [/FONT]
[h=2]In One Year on Average (all ages)[/h][FONT="][B]116,255 people[/B] in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]35,141 people die from gun violence[/FONT]

• 12,246 murdered
• 21,637 die from suicide
• 500 killed unintentionally
• 479 killed by legal intervention
• 279 die but intent was unknown

[FONT="]81,114 people survive gun injuries:[/FONT]

• 60,041 injured in an attack
• 3,700 survive a suicide attempt
• 16,428 shot unintentionally
• 945 people are shot by legal intervention

You want to include suicide in murder rates ,you are kinda stretching matters. As with when shot by police. Arming them (police) with sticks alone would sour morel and reduce those interested in being police. But feel free to enforce the laws where you live unarmed ,if you qualify for such prestige.
A gun is not a cause of suicide ,or the only manner in which one can be carried out. Regardless it is self inflicted.

Feel free to post Canadian statistics showing the recent tremendous increase in gun violence. Nevermind the licensed folk who are hard to find in gun crime reports anyways.
Oh wait ,statistics are not available .....hmmmm. Why is that?

Where do you rate in the European union in violence? Still number four ,or has recent figures increased your status?

[These meetings should be driven by a single question: how can a country with strict laws on purchasing and carrying firearms see such an exponential increase in gun violence over the span of a few years?

Comparing gun violence to other countries isn’t essential in order to see Canada has a serious problem. When mayors and police chiefs in diverse cities like Surrey, Regina, Calgary, Edmonton, Halifax, Ottawa, and Toronto have publicly spoken about their struggles to grapple with rising gun violence, there is a problem. And this problem should elicit the same horror amongst Canadians as mass shootings in cities faraway.]

So, what's goin on?

 

[T.C.]

"In fact, according to the Australian government’s own statistics, a number of serious crimes peaked in the years after the ban. Manslaughter, sexual assault, kidnapping, armed robbery, and unarmed robbery all saw peaks in the years following the ban, and most remain near or above pre-ban rates. The effects of the 1996 ban on violent crime are, frankly, unimpressive at best.

It’s even less impressive when again compared to America’s decrease in violent crime over the same period. According to data from the U.S. Justice Department, violent crime fell nearly 72 percent between 1993 and 2011. Again, this happened as guns were being manufactured and purchased at an ever-increasing rate.

So although you have fewer firearm-related deaths when you disarm law-abiding civilians, violent crime increases, because there is now NO deterrence to criminals. Even a criminal with a knife can rob, rape and murder someone who is unarmed."

Taken from "Wintery Knight" publication.

 

[oldkoot]

How many stories do you read where someone metal detecting got robbed? Maybe one a year? Probably not even that many. Let's be serious here. Metal detecting with a gun strapped to your hip is only going to get you grief from people. If I see some guy with a gun doing anything (even metal detecting) near a school, baseball field or a park, I'm calling the cops. Just the way it is right now.

Bottom line, this is not the time to be carrying a gun anywhere in public. Not a commentary, just a statement of fact. Find another way to defend yourself, if you're so afraid of being mugged.

I am always packing and you are in titled to your opinion but I am one of millions in this country that don't agree with you if more people would carry there would be a whole lot less crap going on just my opinion

 

[oldkoot]

Not everybody who have smart phones are smart.

You no what they say about smart phones don't you Honest Samuel they are only as smart as the idiot using them

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

[h=2]Every Day on Average (ages 0-19)[/h][FONT="]Every day, [B]46 children and teens[/B] are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#363636][FONT="]Every day, 7 children and teens die from gun violence:[/FONT]

[/LIST]

Snipped for brevity's sake.

How do those numbers compare to the rates (of death/injury) for medical errors?

Vehicular accidents?

What do those numbers look like when the statistics from major cities are removed?

(I know the answer to that question - it isn't kind to the side that pushes for infringements)

(Actually, I know the answer to the previous questions too - again, unfriendly to the pro infringement crowd)

Were I to dig deep enough I am positive that I can find all sorts of data that makes Canada look bad. Heck, if I'm willing to use questionable statistics, or cherry-picked data, I'm quite certain that I can make Canada look absolutely horrible to those who don't know any better.

The question is why would I - or anyone - do that? I'm not a citizen of Canada. I don't actually know a lot about the laws in Canada, or the flow of power in Canada. Nor is it actually any of my business. If Canadians wish to disarm themselves - I'm perfectly fine with Canadians doing what they want. As I said, it isn't any of my business.

My rights are my business. This nation was founded on the concept of individual freedoms and limited government. There are plenty of citizens (here) who don't fully comprehend what that means; certainly it would be unreasonable to expect foreigners to understand just what a difference that makes.

It's not that you're incapable of comprehending the value of freedom; it's just that you're not used to the idea of rights holding sway over whims. Given the chance to experience it, I'm relatively sure you'd be quite fond of the policy.

That's no slight toward your person. Freedom isn't always pretty; sometimes it can be more than a little ugly. No matter though, because individual rights matter far more than some spiffy government with all sorts of power over its subjects.

Medical errors make the gun statistics seem like child's play. It isn't a close contest. Yet only a fool would demand that we strip all medical procedures from existence. Nor would a sane person think it reasonable to punish all in the medical community simply because a few have caused great harm.

We don't issue tickets to all who have a license to drive, in the misguided belief that we'll somehow cut down on irresponsible driving by punishing those who aren't guilty.

More pointedly - practicing medicine, as with driving a vehicle on public roads, is not a right. Unlike the right to bear arms, those actions are mere privileges and subject (legally) to the whims and standards set forth by government.

Yet there are many who see the foolishness of punishing all who engage in privilege, but have no issue with punishing all who would engage in their inherent rights? It's an odd thing how some people's lust for control can make them blind to the folly of their whims - but only to the point of themselves being the target for infringement. Then things are different. Then rights matter, but not one second prior.

Suppose that you, as a Canadian citizen in good standing, have inherent rights that are unalienable. Granted, I do not know one way or the other, but let us suppose you do. Of those rights, which rights would you have infringed? Why would you stop said infringement at the point chosen? Would your mind change if others really want your other rights infringed as well? Would it matter if I, as a foreigner with no business in Canada's policies, cited a bunch of questionable statistics that painted your nation in a bad light? Would it matter, to you, if I really despised something - anything - (let's pretend I hate forks) that was a fundamental part of your rights?

How much would I have to dislike something, before you'd give in a let me control that aspect of your life? How could you be sure that I wouldn't want more and more control - after you've already agreed to let me infringe upon your rights? How could you be sure that I wouldn't trample all over all of your rights?

What if I merely wanted to set conditions, that must be met prior to engaging in your rights? Would you agree, or would you point out the fact that rights do not require permissions?

It isn't about lives lost or harm caused. If it were, there are numerous other actions that cost more lives and cause more harm. And I hadn't mentioned abortion prior to this - but you can count that one as absolute proof that it isn't about innocent lives taken away.

It is about control. Not of a tool that is used far more for good (as opposed to bad). No, it is about controlling people. It is about controlling what they can do, what they can say, and how they live. It is about taking power away from the individual and giving it to the absolute worst master possible - government.

I see, with relative frequency, posts on this very forum lamenting the loss of public areas available to hunt. I've not seen a single post defending the heavy-handed approach taken by the various governments involved in shutting down access to lands owned by the people. The end result is - the innocent being punished for the actions of a few idiots. Even you see that - at least I assume you do.

Suppose metal detecting public properties was a right specifically protected in your constitution. Would you be open to negotiating the loss of your rights, simply because some didn't approve of metal detecting? What if they cited data and were citizens of the USA (who didn't like metal detecting)? Would that make you favor government infringement?

Don't pretend, for even 1 second, that your government wouldn't infringe. It has and it will do so again and again. Such is the way of government.

 

[Bates]

I walk through the woods all the time with my dog off a leash of course now if my dog attacked you about the worst thing that would happen is your shoelaces might get untied but he does alert me to Critters and other potentially dangerous situations I do have to say I own my wood so I don't expect to run into anybody but I do get creeped out sometimes out there by myself so I take my 4lb. Wildebeast for security reasons

 

[Red James Cash]

Whoops,looks like I punched a bunch a holes in the commie propaganda.Tisk,tisk.