Brian Trdina has two guns!!!
EP
BBC3
> Is this acceptable???
Pretty poor troll. However, "Bowling for Columbine" by director Michael
Moore (www.michaelmoore.com) was a terrific movie. I'd like to tie all of
this back to bike racing, but screw it.
--
Bill
Sharon Peters
>From: "EP" emmaphillips...@hotmail.com
>Date: 1/28/2003 6:50 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <v3aapq7...@corp.supernews.com>
>
>Is this acceptable???
As long as the serial numbers are still there.............
-----Sharon Peters
Personal Trainer to the Stars--------
Remove "No Junk" to reply please!!!
Tom Kunich
> Is this acceptable???
Why not I have so many I don't have a count off hand.
Lance Indurain
> Is this acceptable???
I have eight or ten, is that o.k. with you?
Point?
VeloRodsMom
> Is this acceptable???
It has been my experience (and believe me, I have plenty) that guys
who own guns, especially a lot of guns, have significant shortcoming
in other areas if you know what I mean.
Mom
Brian Trdina
Actually, I have several guns. If Mr. EP would've read carefully, he'd know
that only 2 of them are worth more than my car.
"Tom Kunich" <cycl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:484e7721.03012...@posting.google.com...
Brian Trdina
"VeloRodsMom" <velor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> It has been my experience (and believe me, I have plenty) that guys
> who own guns, especially a lot of guns, have significant shortcoming
> in other areas if you know what I mean.
I have no problem believeing that you have lots of experience with guys.
Kyle Legate
Why do americans have so many guns? Are you afraid of being more than 10
feet from a weapon of some kind?
... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
leg...@mcmaster.ca Kyle Legate leg...@hotmail.com
Tower of Tongues:Thursday PM:10:30-11:30 EDT:http://cfmu.mcmaster.ca
moon musick:ritual:IDM:experimental(electronica):minimalism:glitch
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...
Bikerecker
>Actually, I have several guns. If Mr. EP would've read carefully, he'd know
>that only 2 of them are worth more than my car.
OK, what's in the quiver?
I am thinking about carrying a gun on solo rides. For the dogs, of course.
Checking into permitting, etc.
Greg
brian trdina
"Bikerecker" <biker...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030127225851...@mb-fa.aol.com...
Despite all the assholes that you meet who try to run you off the road, I
haven't really ever felt the need to carry when riding. (I don't know where
you train, though). If I were gonna do make the decision to carry while
riding, I'd get something small, easy to operate, and really safe: maybe a
Ruger .22 revolver. Finding shorts that will accomadate an inside-the-belt
holster might be tough (you certainly don't want a gun bouncing around in
your jersey pocket).
As for permitting, it varies by state. www.nra.org will have info on how to
get a concealed carry permit for your state.
brian trdina
"Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca> wrote in message
> Why do americans have so many guns? Are you afraid of being more than 10
> feet from a weapon of some kind?
>
>
Because many Americans recognize that posessing the means to resist attack
makes one inherently safer.
TritonRider
>Because many Americans recognize that posessing the means to resist attack
>makes one inherently safer.
If you add in having developed the skill to use the tool safely and accurately
this may well be the most accurate intelligent thing I have seen you say.
Besides target competitions require incredible hand eye coordination,
decision making, and body control on the pistol side especially if you shoot
IPSC. I shoot rifle matches which are nowhere near as hectic.
Bill C.
TritonRider
>OK, what's in the quiver?
>I am thinking about carrying a gun on solo rides. For the dogs, of course.
>Checking into permitting, etc.
>Greg
>
My suggestion would be to get a small container of bear strength pepper spray.
Safer all around, simpler to use, and less legal hassle if you do.
Bill C.
Kyle Legate
Nice flawed arguement there. The safety arguement flies just as well for
guns as it does for SUVs. Why do you feel that you're prone to attack?
Lance Indurain
>Are you afraid of being more than 10 feet from a weapon of some kind?
No, but someone has to be. Who else would we live it to, the French?
Germans? Canadians?
Lance Indurain
> It has been my experience (and believe me, I have plenty) that guys
> who own guns, especially a lot of guns, have significant shortcoming
> in other areas if you know what I mean.
>
> Mom
Mom, that's not what you told me last night. You could barely handle my "gun!"
Lance Indurain
Brian Trdina
> guns as it does for SUVs.
Huh...?
> Why do you feel that you're prone to attack?
>
I don't feel I'm prone to attack. I don't feel like I'm prone to having my
house catch on fire, either. However, I still have a fire extinguisher in
my kitchen so that I may be in a position to react if it does, though.
What's the problem with posessing the means to protect ones' self? Are you
one of those eunichs who think that its someone else's job to make sure that
they're safe?
Bruce Johnston
it. I think some of us grew up watching old westerns on TV as well as modern
ones like Clint Eastwood and Dirty Harry, and feel we need them or
definitely as a sense of pride in a hobby. Especially sporting guns. Today's
youth didn't see the old westerns but got the new generation of Hollywood
movies and video games to thank for their fascination with guns, even the
kids in schools with guns. As for me I never really had any guns except a 22
and a shotgun that sits in the garage. I don't need to be ten feet near a
gun and they are old guns from my teen years where I went out doing target
practice. I don't keep any guns in the house. I have thought about carrying
a gun on my MB rides but only because of bears and mountain lions,
rattlesnakes on the trail.
Bruce
-------------------------------
"Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.33.030128...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca...
JTN
kick ass thread.
I knew there were other cyclist out there that enjoy the smell of burnt
powder.
to bikerecker who wants to pack while riding. don't do it. your life would
be fricken miserable after you did even if its self defense. pepper spray is
the way to go. believe me. as many bullshit laws that are currently out,
there isn't one that makes it legal to shoot some drunken slob trying to
kill you with a 2000 lb blunt instrument on wheels. you get fucked just for
kicking his ass, let alone saving the rest of the earth from him
propagating.
hey "mom" come hunting with me sometime and you could see the best use for a
firearm that Americans have the right to own. there is a good side to them
besides the bad that you choose only to remember. those ducks and elk are
much less tainted than that chicken or beef you buy at the grocery store all
neatly packaged. remember though, going back to your roots to get your food
is not for the faint of heart. of course if your a vegetarian, that's o.k.
too. more power to you. doesn't work for me though.
guns, bicycles and Americans. just one of those things, I.e. the French
husband and his mistress is also just one of those things.
known gun owners from the euro side, pardon the spelling errors.
duclo LaSalle
Miguel indurain
jean Claude keely, "he loves hand guns from America the most"
bernard hinault
young vandenbrooke - maybe this is why he went nuts though? does he still
own the hunt camp in Germany?
its not wrong to own guns , its wrong to misuse guns.
Top Sirloin
>I don't feel I'm prone to attack. I don't feel like I'm prone to having my
>house catch on fire, either. However, I still have a fire extinguisher in
>my kitchen so that I may be in a position to react if it does, though.
>
>What's the problem with posessing the means to protect ones' self? Are you
>one of those eunichs who think that its someone else's job to make sure that
>they're safe?
rbr is just to the left of ANSWER.
--
Scott Johnson
"Good luck, fat people." -Jamie Woon
Kyle Legate
> What's the problem with posessing the means to protect ones' self? Are you
> one of those eunichs who think that its someone else's job to make sure that
> they're safe?
>
This is all you need to protect yourself:
1. intelligence
2. awareness of your surroundings
3. non-lethal means of deterrent, as a last resort.
If you are thinking of protecting yourself with a gun from another person
with a gun, you will be shot dead reaching for it.
Kurgan Gringioni
"Brian Trdina" <trd...@dejazzd.com> wrote in message
news:7jyZ9.1521$N5.9...@nnrp1.ptd.net...
Guides in Montana quit using guns as protection against Grizzlies. The
replacement is a large cannister of pepper spray. The pepper spray never
misses because it shoots out a large cloud. It has the added benefit of not
killing the bear whose territory has just been invaded.
The drawback of a gun is that if a non-lethal shot is delivered to the bear,
the human is screwed. It is not a simple matter to deal a lethal shot to a
Grizzly, especially under extreme stress.
brian trdina
"Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca
> > What's the problem with posessing the means to protect ones' self? Are
you
> > one of those eunichs who think that its someone else's job to make sure
that
> > they're safe?
> >
> This is all you need to protect yourself:
> 1. intelligence
> 2. awareness of your surroundings
> 3. non-lethal means of deterrent, as a last resort.
>
> If you are thinking of protecting yourself with a gun from another person
> with a gun, you will be shot dead reaching for it.
>
Kyle,
I agree that each of the things that you list are important. However, I
also believe that reasonably forseeable situations arise where access to and
knowledge of guns is indespensible to ensure one's protection.
That being said, I'm intriuged by your apparent knowledge of the subject,
and I'd like to hear more regarding your first hand experience using guns
for self defense. I'd be particluarly interested in learning why that
experience has lead you to the conclusion that they're unnecessary. Until
then, I will assume that you're merely another blow-hard ass who has never
taken the time/energy to educate themselves in the proper use of firearms,
but is willing to demagoge the issue because 'guns are scary.'
Thanks in advance.
Brian
JTN
themselves clean as I walk off into the sunset.
just my preference though
jtn
sierra club society director of bear research
brian trdina
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringion...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> Guides in Montana quit using guns as protection against Grizzlies. The
> replacement is a large cannister of pepper spray. The pepper spray never
> misses because it shoots out a large cloud. It has the added benefit of
not
> killing the bear whose territory has just been invaded.
>
> The drawback of a gun is that if a non-lethal shot is delivered to the
bear,
> the human is screwed. It is not a simple matter to deal a lethal shot to a
> Grizzly, especially under extreme stress.
>
I live in the city. I'm not worried about Grizzlies.
Kyle Legate
> That being said, I'm intriuged by your apparent knowledge of the subject,
> and I'd like to hear more regarding your first hand experience using guns
> for self defense. I'd be particluarly interested in learning why that
> experience has lead you to the conclusion that they're unnecessary.
>
First, I would like you to justify the need for more than one. I don't
take exception to you having a gun, I understand that as an American you
believe that a gun can solve all your problems. It concerns me that you
think you need several guns.
ronde champ
"brian trdina" <trd...@dejazzd.com> wrote in message
news:HEzZ9.1529$N5.9...@nnrp1.ptd.net...
Lancaster is no fucking city.
Thanks,
Ronde Champ
TritonRider
>First, I would like you to justify the need for more than one. I don't
>take exception to you having a gun, I understand that as an American you
>believe that a gun can solve all your problems. It concerns me that you
>think you need several guns.
>
>... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>leg...@mcmaster.ca Kyle Legate leg...@hotmail.com
Kyle, I can easily justify the need for several.
1. Single shot .22 rifle for teaching kids safety and proper handling and
skills.
2. .22 pistol same reasons.
3. Shotgun, you can make do with one with a variable choke for most upland game
birds, though it is nice to have the most efficient tool.
4. Larger caliber rifle for elk, bear, etc. Could be the same one as used for
target competitions but usually is not.
5. Larger caliber pistol for defense, if you think this way,(mine's locked in
the safe in a locked room in another section of the house where the kids can't
get at it without a huge effort since they are special keys and I always
control one, and the other is in a safe deposit.) and target shooting because
it's fun.
6. I enjoy historical collectibles so this would allow in at least one or two
balck powder and early military. ie 1903 springfield bolt action rifle, 1943
ww2 garand. Not much interested in anything newer than that. Maybe an Enfield
from Canada there are still some nice ones available up there.
My point here is that there are a lot of reasons for owning more than one gun.
They are just tools, deadly yeah, but so is my car, motorcyle, acetylene torch
set, etc...
Using a firearm for competent self defense is a huge commitment in time,
lessons, practice, and safety. I have not stayed current enough to be more
dangerous with a pistol than I would be with pepper spray, and as I said with
kids in the house my judgement is that it's not worth the risk to have a gun
that's not locked away.
Granted they all have been taught appropriate safety to thier age, but why
tempt them.
Bill C.
Tom Kunich
OK, who are you and why are you posting as that dumb shit Trdina?
Kurgan Gringioni
"brian trdina" <trd...@dejazzd.com> wrote in message
news:HEzZ9.1529$N5.9...@nnrp1.ptd.net...
The point is, that you don't need a gun. Large cannister pepper spray can be
used against humans also.
BTW, I own a gun, so I'm not anti-gun, however, I recognize the fact that
there are alternatives.
heather halvorson
Kyle Legate wrote:
>
> On 27 Jan 2003, Lance Indurain wrote:
>
> > "EP" wrote in message
> > > Is this acceptable???
> >
> > I have eight or ten, is that o.k. with you?
> >
> Why do americans have so many guns? Are you afraid of being more than 10
> feet from a weapon of some kind?
i have friends who own many guns. they have so many because they like
them. for them, it's a collecting kind of thing, the way some people
have 5 cars even though they really only drive one.
heather
BBC3
> Why do americans have so many guns? Are you afraid of being more than 10
> feet from a weapon of some kind?
U.S. Citizens are really good at killing U.S. Citizens with the guns U.S.
Citizens own. Citizens of other countries (like Canada) seem to be able to
own just as many guns per capita without shooting each other up. "Bowling
for Columbine" by director Michael Moore does a great job of looking into
exactly this issue.
Cyclists should never have to carry a gun for protection. If you simply
have to carry some type of protection on the bike, pepper mace will work
every time. Works on aggressive dogs too. Certainly a much safer multi-use
deterrent than a gun. You can always rinse pepper mace out of somebody's
eyes after a few hours, but you can't unshoot somebody.
--
Bill
brian trdina
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, brian trdina wrote:
>
> > That being said, I'm intriuged by your apparent knowledge of the
subject,
> > and I'd like to hear more regarding your first hand experience using
guns
> > for self defense. I'd be particluarly interested in learning why that
> > experience has lead you to the conclusion that they're unnecessary.
> >
> First, I would like you to justify the need for more than one. I don't
> take exception to you having a gun, I understand that as an American you
> believe that a gun can solve all your problems. It concerns me that you
> think you need several guns.
>
>
Okay, here goes:
.357 magnum: easy to operate, safe home protection. (I keep it loaded with
manstoppers in my Mossberg Instant Access safe in my bedroom closet. My
wife is the easily the equal to a steriod-crazed linebacker when in
posession of this one, and it can go from safely locked away to ready to
fire in about 8 seconds.)
.22 single shot rifle bolt action rifle: Extremely accurate gun, good for
cheap plinking and for teaching newbies about gun safety. With a little
practice, I can have the average person making 6-in groups at 100 yds with
it.
.22 semi-automatic pistol: Cheap plinking, fun target gun. Also good for
teaching gun safety and good technique for handgunning.
.380 semi-automatic Beretta Model 84: easily concealed carry gun w/lots of
firepower (although there are alot of people who will swear that anything
less than a .45 is lousy for self protection, I say that a smaller-caliber
but comfortable-to-carry gun is better than a .45 left at home because its a
pain)
9mm Beretta 92FS: This is perhaps the only 'boutique' gun that I own. I
bought it on a whim after it became the US millitary-issue side arm. 17
rounds of pure fun.
Someday. I'd also like to get a nice over-under shotgun, too. After all,
you can't very well shoot skeet with a .22.
There you go. Now about your plethora of first-hand gun experiences that
have lead you to the conclusion that they are a poor means of self defense.
You know, Kyle, there is some honor in just admitting that you don't know
what the fuck you're talking about.
brian trdina
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringion...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> The point is, that you don't need a gun. Large cannister pepper spray can
be
> used against humans also.
>
> BTW, I own a gun, so I'm not anti-gun, however, I recognize the fact that
> there are alternatives.
>
I agree that there are alternatives, and I personally think that carrying a
gun when you ride is a bad idea. However, mace, pepper spray, and the like
have drawbacks. I was at a party once where some dipshit chick thought it
would be funny to pepper spray some guy during a card game. It literally
cleared out the entire place for about an hour. The lesson: Indoor use of
pepper spray is not a good idea, as the user is very likely to suffer the
effects as well. Also, unless you're willing to face assailant who has a
gun with a can of pepper spray, I'd consider it a poor choice as protection
in the home.
brian trdina
"BBC3" <w_b...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Z8CZ9.71502$Ve4.6659@sccrnsc03...
> "Kyle Legate" wrote:
> > Why do americans have so many guns? Are you afraid of being more than 10
> > feet from a weapon of some kind?
>
> U.S. Citizens are really good at killing U.S. Citizens with the guns U.S.
> Citizens own. Citizens of other countries (like Canada) seem to be able
to
> own just as many guns per capita without shooting each other up. "Bowling
> for Columbine" by director Michael Moore does a great job of looking into
> exactly this issue.
>
Good point.
Hey, have you looked at the rate of gun crimes in London yet since they
'banned' guns in jolly old england? Right now you're more likely to get
mugged or have your home burglarized by an armed intruder in London than in
any North American city.
Cheers...!
TritonRider
>U.S. Citizens are really good at killing U.S. Citizens with the guns U.S.
>Citizens own. Citizens of other countries (like Canada) seem to be able to
>own just as many guns per capita without shooting each other up. "Bowling
>for Columbine" by director Michael Moore does a great job of looking into
>exactly this issue.
I am going to dispute this "Bowling for Columbine" does exactly what it was
written to do provide one point of view.
Britain which has pretty much stripped it's citizens of guns is experiencing
a huge upswing in gun crime, it is now approaching our per capita numbers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2640817.stm
If you look there is a lot more discussion of the issue. There have been
similar findings in Canada.
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/020717/d020717b.htm
Also Australia.
http://www.spinneypress.com.au/116_book_desc.html
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/11/1039379881294.html
I would make the argument that people are good at killing people no matter
what the preferred method is. Even in countries with very limited or no
firearms ownership. The only people that gun laws effect are law abiding
people.
Here in Mass. the law calls for a mandatory 1 year sentence right off the top
for using a firearm in the commission of a crime. Last set of stats say that
the prosecutors around the state plea bargain away over 70% of these charges.
They get short jail sentences, lot's the time, time served and probation. If
the laws we already have were enforced there would be a lot less gun crime in a
few years. Unfortunately it's not about crime, saving lives, safety here. It's
about a political agenda.
Bill C.
Ronaldo Jeremiah
> "Bikerecker" <biker...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030127225851...@mb-fa.aol.com...
> > Brian Trdina wrote:
> > >Actually, I have several guns. If Mr. EP would've read carefully, he'd
> know
> > >that only 2 of them are worth more than my car.
> >
> > OK, what's in the quiver?
> > I am thinking about carrying a gun on solo rides. For the dogs, of
> course.
> > Checking into permitting, etc.
> > Greg
>
> haven't really ever felt the need to carry when riding. (I don't know where
> you train, though). If I were gonna do make the decision to carry while
> riding, I'd get something small, easy to operate, and really safe: maybe a
> Ruger .22 revolver. Finding shorts that will accomadate an inside-the-belt
> holster might be tough (you certainly don't want a gun bouncing around in
> your jersey pocket).
The juncture of the top tube and head tube is an excellent place for a
small holster. Puts the heat right where you need it.
-RJ
Ken Papai
"brian trdina" <trdina...@nnrp1.ptd.net...
>
>
> .380 semi-automatic Beretta Model 84: easily concealed carry gun w/lots of
> firepower (although there are alot of people who will swear that anything
> less than a .45 is lousy for self protection, I say that a smaller-caliber
> but comfortable-to-carry gun is better than a .45 left at home because its
a
> pain)
>
> 9mm Beretta 92FS: This is perhaps the only 'boutique' gun that I own. I
> bought it on a whim after it became the US millitary-issue side arm. 17
> rounds of pure fun.
You'd also consider a SIG Sauer P226 boutique (also 9mm, 15 round clip)?
Brian Trdina
"Ken Papai" <k...@kenpapai.com> wrote in message
> You'd also consider a SIG Sauer P226 boutique (also 9mm, 15 round clip)?
>
Maybe not this one:
http://double.uhome.net/gun/gun640/handgun/sig_sauer_p226.jpg
but this one is:
http://www.replicgun.com/Sig%2015cih.jpg
Get some mother-of-pearl grips, a gold toof, and a low-rider caddy and you'd
be all set to do some serious pimpin' wit dat peice.
Maybe 'boutique' is a bad descriptor for my 92FS. 'Frivolous' is more what
I meant.
Kyle Legate
I never got the conclusion that they are a poor means of self defense,
where did you read that? They are a good means of self defense but way
over the top, especially the one you keep loaded in your bedroom. Almost
all home invasions are specific targets; nearly none are random. If you
feel that your home is at risk of being invaded I think you're running
with the wrong crowd.
I respect Bill's reasons because he hunts, and is a legitimate
collector. What are you going to hunt with a .22 or a Beretta? I could
never understand Americans' fascination with guns, and neither can most
Canadian's I think. I know of no public shooting ranges in my area, nor
any place where someone could safely engage in 'cheap plinking'.
> You know, Kyle, there is some honor in just admitting that you don't know
> what the fuck you're talking about.
>
What am I talking about?
Adam Hodges Myerson
guns per capita than Americans.
They just don't shoot each other with them as often.
Adam
in article Pine.SOL.4.33.030127...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca,
Kyle Legate at leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca wrote on 1/27/03 8:41 PM:
> On 27 Jan 2003, Lance Indurain wrote:
>
>> "EP" wrote in message
>>> Is this acceptable???
>>
>> I have eight or ten, is that o.k. with you?
>>
> Why do americans have so many guns? Are you afraid of being more than 10
> feet from a weapon of some kind?
>
Adam Hodges Myerson
rip...@sierratel.com wrote on 1/28/03 11:42 AM:
> Canadians don't understand our fascination with guns and think we don't get
> it. I think some of us grew up watching old westerns on TV as well as modern
> ones like Clint Eastwood and Dirty Harry, and feel we need them or
> definitely as a sense of pride in a hobby. Especially sporting guns. Today's
> youth didn't see the old westerns but got the new generation of Hollywood
> movies and video games to thank for their fascination with guns, even the
> kids in schools with guns. As for me I never really had any guns except a 22
> and a shotgun that sits in the garage. I don't need to be ten feet near a
> gun and they are old guns from my teen years where I went out doing target
> practice. I don't keep any guns in the house. I have thought about carrying
> a gun on my MB rides but only because of bears and mountain lions,
> rattlesnakes on the trail.
>
>
>
> Bruce
And what do you think Canadians grew up watching? Swiss TV shows?
Speaking of the Swiss, there's a gun in every Swiss home, too (when I lived
there it was mounted on the wall of the family I stayed with) and they don't
shoot each other like we do, either.
I almost feel like if you haven't seen Bowling for Columbine yet, you're not
qualified to participate in a conversation about Americans and guns.
Adam
JTN
bike weight nominal= 19 lbs/8.62 kg
with american defense system:
1 rem 1100 12guage
1 marlin 35 lever
1 357
1 10/22 ruger
1 win 300 mag
approximately 41 lbs/18.6 kg
you should see my best friend from frances face when i open the gun
safe.....he thinks all americans are fucking cowboys....
hahahahahahh
we are.............and its fun as shit
Bruce Johnston
issue. In tightly packed inner cities there are more guns then in rural or
mountain regions. Also the reasons for many of these guns are gang related
and crime related. Of course many in inner cities carry guns and have guns
in their home for that very reason. Some states and cities that have gun
shows and many shooting ranges are going to have more guns then other cities
in other states. Where I live in the mountains many folks leave the keys in
their car and their door unlocked. I do it too. There is just very low crime
where I live, but many folks here have guns because they are cowboys and
hunters. But the mindset here is completely different from those with guns
in a tightly packed city neighborhood. For the most part we don't settle
disputes with guns where I live like they do in the big city. It's unfair to
say that American's don't get it or paint the US with a broad brush. And
that's not to mention Hawaii and Alaska, and what about the Federal states,
Virgin Islands, etc?
B-
---------------------------
"Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.33.030128...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca...
Brian Trdina
"Adam Hodges Myerson" <ad...@cycle-smart.com> wrote in message
news:BA5C7478.1D90%ad...@cycle-smart.com...
> According to Michael Moore in Bowling for Columnbine, Canadians have more
> guns per capita than Americans.
>
> They just don't shoot each other with them as often.
>
> Adam
>
Violence is a cultural phenomea. The former soviet union had extrememly
high rates of muder for a developed country, and civilian ownership of
firearms was virually non-existant.
Recall archie bunker's classic words when gloria asked him to explain the
high rate of gun murders in new york:
"Would it make you feel better if they'da been pushed out a windas...!"
Brian Trdina
> I never got the conclusion that they are a poor means of self defense,
> where did you read that?
Retard, you said that if facing an attacker with a gun, I'd be shot before I
had a chance to use my gun, and recommended pepper spray or some other means
of non-lethal protection. Sorry, keep your pepper spray, I'd rather have my
gun in such a situation.
> Almost
> all home invasions are specific targets; nearly none are random.
Random, or non-random, someone who decides to burgalrize my house when my
wife or I am home will be facing armed resistance.
> If you
> feel that your home is at risk of being invaded I think you're running
> with the wrong crowd.
None of my friends are bugulars, and I don't think that people's homes
typically get burglarized by their friends. Again, I don't think you know
what the fuck you're talking about.
> I respect Bill's reasons because he hunts, and is a legitimate
> collector. What are you going to hunt with a .22 or a Beretta?
Go back and read the posts. With the excption of the shotgun and rifles,
Bill's guns (and methods of storage) are basically identical to mine.
> I could
> never understand Americans' fascination with guns, and neither can most
> Canadian's I think. I know of no public shooting ranges in my area, nor
> any place where someone could safely engage in 'cheap plinking'.
Alternately stated: "I've never had the opportunity to actually learn
anything about guns, how they work, or what they're used for, yet I choose
to have an opinion and believe that I am annointed to tell others what to
think about them"
> > You know, Kyle, there is some honor in just admitting that you don't
know
> > what the fuck you're talking about.
> >
> What am I talking about?
Nothing that you know anything about. Yet you keep talking. Its pretty
amazing, actually.
Bruce Johnston
thread. And that is where I live in the mountains there is low crime and we
rarely settle disputes with guns, even though many cowboys and hunters here
have guns. I think it's more a [regional issue] then anything else. Cities
with high crime rates have a different mindset with their handguns then the
folks that have guns around here. It's not the gun, it's the environment
that you live in that gives you the mindset about how guns are used. There
are a lot of old fashioned folks here that are deer hunters, and are really
nice people like Michael Landons Little House on the Prairie and they go
deer hunting but I am sure it is the furtherest thing from their mind to use
their gun in self defense to shoot someone else. How people feel about guns
and use guns varies depending on geographical location and of course
obviously how tightly packed people live together, like in big cities. Also
like I said before, how about cities that have a lot of gun shows and are
Pro guns for most part and have tons of gun shops that sell tons of guns. I
don't think I would want to live there. As for the Swiss, if they settle
disputes without guns then that's great!
B-
---------------------------
"Adam Hodges Myerson" <ad...@cycle-smart.com> wrote in message
news:BA5C755A.1D92%ad...@cycle-smart.com...
Bruce Johnston
"Adam Hodges Myerson" <ad...@cycle-smart.com> wrote in message
news:BA5C755A.1D92%ad...@cycle-smart.com...
> rip...@sierratel.com wrote on 1/28/03 11:42 AM:
>
not
> qualified to participate in a conversation about Americans and guns.
>
BTW, I like Michael Moore and I listen to him every chance I get. I have
seen a number of his shootouts on TV shows where they have discussed this
very issue.
Politically Incorrect, for one.
B-
BBC3
> Hey, have you looked at the rate of gun crimes in London yet since they
> 'banned' guns in jolly old england? Right now you're more likely to get
> mugged or have your home burglarized by an armed intruder in London than
in
> any North American city.
Not sure about London, but here in the USA the majority of gun deaths
(56.5%) are suicides. I say let 'em have guns. The herd needs some
thinning anyway, and who better than those intent on offing themselves.
With just under 280 million Americans and there were over 28,000 firearm
related deaths in the USA in the year 2000, and over 50% of those were
suicides. Almost none of those suicides were Cat2 or above. Think about
it. Anyway .... You are far more likely to be struck by lightning on your
bike than you are to need a gun. Of course if you get a bad result in a
race, you could certainly expedite the self-offing process much faster if
you had your gun. Great way to thin out some of the pack filler.
---------------------------------------------
"A gun in the home is four times more likely to be involved in an
unintentional shooting, seven times more like to be used in a criminal
assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely to be used to commit or
attempt a suicide than to be used in self-defense."
Kellerman, Arthur L., et. al. "Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the
Home."
Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection, and Critical Care. Volume 45, No. 2.
August 1998
---------------------------------------------
I grew up with guns and was taught proper gun safety by my Grandfather.
Guns in my family were used strictly for hunting, and we ate everything we
killed. Kids in my family had extreme respect for firearms, and still do
today as adults. I support the "right" to bear arms in the USA, but I wish
our culture here in the USA was not based on the "shoot first and ask
questions later" motif.
I'll stick to pepper spray for protection while on my bike. Weight = just a
few ounces, protection = extreme deterrent. I have also never heard of
someone being put on death row or serving a life sentence for spraying
somebody with pepper/mace spray. Pepper mace is safe for both parties --
the attackee and the attacker. At the end of the day both walk away
unharmed and at least one of them has learned a valuable lesson.
--
Bill
More References:
-------------------------------------------------
Mortality rates in the USA
http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate.html
Gun related death statistics
http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm
The Pomeranian
BBC3 wrote:
>
> Cyclists should never have to carry a gun for protection. If you simply
> have to carry some type of protection on the bike, pepper mace will work
> every time.
Yeah, but what if I rather just shoot dead the mf'ers trying to rob me
while I'm riding alone on a remote mountain road? Think of the benefit
to society. BTW, I don't own a gun and never have owned one.
The Pomeranian
Brian Trdina wrote:
>
> Random, or non-random, someone who decides to burgalrize my house when my
> wife or I am home will be facing armed resistance.
If you make sure you cock the gun loud enough, they will probably decide
to turn around and not face anything. It really is an intimdating
sound.
Tom Kunich
ignorance wrote in message
news:huzZ9.13467$ni5.1...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
>
> Guides in Montana quit using guns as protection against Grizzlies.
The
> replacement is a large cannister of pepper spray. The pepper spray
never
> misses because it shoots out a large cloud. It has the added benefit
of not
> killing the bear whose territory has just been invaded.
Apparently you've never actually used pepper spray. It can piss off
bears just like it pisses off some people. Do you guys have any real
life experience with anything other than a keyboard?
> The drawback of a gun is that if a non-lethal shot is delivered to
the bear,
> the human is screwed. It is not a simple matter to deal a lethal
shot to a
> Grizzly, especially under extreme stress.
You seem to be indicating that a reasonable alternative is to do
nothing.
Kyle Legate
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca>
>
> > I never got the conclusion that they are a poor means of self defense,
> > where did you read that?
>
> Retard, you said that if facing an attacker with a gun, I'd be shot before I
> had a chance to use my gun, and recommended pepper spray or some other means
> of non-lethal protection. Sorry, keep your pepper spray, I'd rather have my
> gun in such a situation.
>
Retard, how does your statement answer my question?
> > If you
> > feel that your home is at risk of being invaded I think you're running
> > with the wrong crowd.
>
> None of my friends are bugulars, and I don't think that people's homes
> typically get burglarized by their friends. Again, I don't think you know
> what the fuck you're talking about.
>
Two groups are typically victims of home invasion, and neither of them are
random: the elderly, and drug dealers. The elderly because they are
vulnerable, typically keep valuables at home, are easily intimidated and
burglars are cowards. Drug dealers because they keep a lot of money around
and the burglars know that drugs are freely available for the taking.
Which demographic do you fall under?
> > never understand Americans' fascination with guns, and neither can most
> > Canadian's I think. I know of no public shooting ranges in my area, nor
> > any place where someone could safely engage in 'cheap plinking'.
>
> Alternately stated: "I've never had the opportunity to actually learn
> anything about guns, how they work, or what they're used for, yet I choose
> to have an opinion and believe that I am annointed to tell others what to
> think about them"
>
Two points: 1. yes I am entitled to an opinion, 2. You're clearly stupid
if you think I am trying to influence your thoughts in any way. Point out
where I say, "You should think this...".
Brian Trdina
> ---------------------------------------------
> "A gun in the home is four times more likely to be involved in an
> unintentional shooting, seven times more like to be used in a criminal
> assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely to be used to commit or
> attempt a suicide than to be used in self-defense."
>
> Kellerman, Arthur L., et. al. "Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the
> Home."
> Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection, and Critical Care. Volume 45, No. 2.
> August 1998
> ---------------------------------------------
The kellerman study (a favorite reference by the gun control crowd) only
counted cases where the gun was acutally fired as a 'uses in self defense.'
In the vast majority of cases where a firearm is emloyed in a defensive
capacity, merely showing the potential attacker the gun is enough to difuse
the situation. Also, comparing guns used in suicides with guns used in
defense of crimes is comparing apples to oranges.
The most well-reasearched evaluation of the effects of gun posession on
crime rates was done by John Lott (a University of Chicago Economist), and
it concluded that, in virtually every case examamed, increased civilian
posession of firearms results in lower rates of violent crime (title: More
Guns, Less Crime www.amazon.com). Perhaps the most telling aspect of the
book is that Lott was personally favored gun control until he performed the
research that led to its publication. Of couse, its much simpler for his
critics to demagogue the issue than it is to try to understand and
subsequently employ sound statistical methods to analyse the available data.
Its also remarkable that some of the country's leading medical journals have
allowed themselves to be the tools by which poor data analyses masking as
'science' are presented to the public. Its a telling commentary on how far
seemingly rational people (scientists, no less) will go to cling to the
litany that they've established for themselves as the truth.
Tom Kunich
the middle of the night. A car with three blacks came up and ran into
him knocking him down and they got out ostensibly to rob him. They
didn't laugh for long since he pulled a pistol and shot all three. Two
made it back to the car where one of them died and the third passed
out losing control and ran into a parked car.
The Asian kid disappeared and before the cops got there another Asian
drove up in a car, picked up the bike and drove off into the sunset.
The moral of this story is that you never know where and when you
might need some protection. And there are now three punks who will
never run down another cyclist.
And for three months after that happened it was a joy to ride a bike
in the bay area. Cars gave you plenty of room and the usual nutcakes
that take a close pass at you were non-existant.
I would dearly love to have seen Kyle's non-lethal deterent in that
case. Some people just don't have any sense at all.
"brian trdina" <trd...@dejazzd.com> wrote in message
news:%zzZ9.1528$N5.9...@nnrp1.ptd.net...
>
> "Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca
>
> > > What's the problem with posessing the means to protect ones'
self? Are
> you
> > > one of those eunichs who think that its someone else's job to
make sure
> that
> > > they're safe?
> > >
> > This is all you need to protect yourself:
> > 1. intelligence
> > 2. awareness of your surroundings
> > 3. non-lethal means of deterrent, as a last resort.
> >
> > If you are thinking of protecting yourself with a gun from another
person
> > with a gun, you will be shot dead reaching for it.
> >
>
> Kyle,
>
> I agree that each of the things that you list are important.
However, I
> also believe that reasonably forseeable situations arise where
access to and
> knowledge of guns is indespensible to ensure one's protection.
>
> That being said, I'm intriuged by your apparent knowledge of the
subject,
> and I'd like to hear more regarding your first hand experience using
guns
> for self defense. I'd be particluarly interested in learning why
that
> experience has lead you to the conclusion that they're unnecessary.
Until
> then, I will assume that you're merely another blow-hard ass who has
never
> taken the time/energy to educate themselves in the proper use of
firearms,
> but is willing to demagoge the issue because 'guns are scary.'
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
Tom Kunich
>
> You know, Kyle, there is some honor in just admitting that you don't
know
> what the fuck you're talking about.
Ar ewe talking about the same Kyle "I know all there is to know about
everything Liberal" Legate?
Brian Trdina
"The Pomeranian"
Yeah. If I didn't have kids, I'd probably keep a pump action shot gun
around for just such a situation. Any malcontent who can listen to the pump
action being worked without shitting his pants is either really dumb or
really loaded.
Brian Trdina
Okay Kyle. You win. You know everything there is to know about guns. No
one should ever be allowed to have one around, and they're certainly not of
any use during a burglery.
Have a nice day.
"Kyle Legate" <leg...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.33.030128...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca...
Kurgan Gringioni
Large cannister pepper spray has its advantages in the home. The homeowner
has home field advantage - he/she knows where everything goes. Run into the
next room, stick the pepper spray around the corner and the would-be-burglar
is screwed. The shoot-first-ack-questions-later policy can be used w/
impunity and with no chance of blowing away friends, relatives or neighbors.
It has its advantages on the bike too. Imagine pulling up to a pickup truck
w/ rednecks and filling up the cab w/ pepper spray.
Kurgan Gringioni
"Bruce Johnston" <rip...@sierratel.com> wrote in message
news:3e37...@news.sierratel.com...
> That's exactly the point I was making in another layer off the root of
this
> thread. And that is where I live in the mountains there is low crime and
we
> rarely settle disputes with guns, even though many cowboys and hunters
here
> have guns. I think it's more a [regional issue] then anything else. Cities
> with high crime rates have a different mindset with their handguns then
the
> folks that have guns around here.
<snip>
It's directly related to the density of the population.
In rural areas (low density), gun ownership is generally not a problem.
In metropolitan areas (high density), gun ownership is a problem.
Tom Kunich
news:BA5C755A.1D92%ad...@cycle-smart.com...
you're not
> qualified to participate in a conversation about Americans and guns.
Now there's a real realtionship for you. Some liberal asswipe crying
about a couple of loonies is certainly going to change the way I see
the world. The guns those two kids had were the least of the problem.
If those propane bombs had gone off no one would have given a shit
about the handguns.
Kurgan Gringioni
"Tom Kunich" <cycl...@yahoo.com> wrote
<snip><snip><snip>
do some people post from multiple accounts? I thought I killfiled this
character.
Tom Kunich
of this
> thread. And that is where I live in the mountains there is low crime
and we
> rarely settle disputes with guns, even though many cowboys and
hunters here
> have guns.
I worked in a Yamaha shop when you met the nicest people on a Honda.
One of the salemen and I got into an argument about how many people
were carrying guns. He told me to just ask. So one day when I was
working the parts counter I would ask people who came in singly to buy
parts. Like the salesman told me, 80% of the people were carrying
guns. And not little .25 belly guns but Lugers and .32 Supers and a
lot of .45 Autos.
Oakland has a large murder problem now but then it didn't. Those
people were just regular Joes and they were carrying guns just in
case. I'd be willing to bet that none of them ever used a gun for
anything but target practice in their lives but they felt more
confident and steady with a gun on them. So be it. They weren't a
problem.
As for myself, I was almost the smallest guy my class through school
until sometime in High School when I grew a lot. I had to fight a lot
because I was white growing up in a black neighborhood. So I never had
a fear of fighting. I never felt the need to carry a gun but the
overwhelming majority of people who do aren't a problem. And isn't
that what America is about?
Brian Trdina
"Adam Hodges Myerson" <ad...@cycle-smart.com> wrote in message
news:BA5C755A.1D92%ad...@cycle-smart.com...
> Speaking of the Swiss, there's a gun in every Swiss home, too (when I
lived
> there it was mounted on the wall of the family I stayed with) and they
don't
> shoot each other like we do, either.
>
> I almost feel like if you haven't seen Bowling for Columbine yet, you're
not
> qualified to participate in a conversation about Americans and guns.
>
> Adam
>
I'm pretty confident that one of the low points in your life was the time
that I made you watch a whole episode of 'American Shooter.'
That was a classic episode, too. Remeber Bob Lunden popping the balloon
with the snub-nosed .38 at 200 yards? That's great stuff!
Kyle Legate
I never invoke the liberals. Why do you capitalize that word? Is it
because you think them important because you think they stole all your
money?
Tom Kunich
news:V1GZ9.73930$VU6....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
your
> bike than you are to need a gun.
So what do you think is wrong with gun ownership? Or is this another
of your mindless Liberal rants like calling anyone racist that tells a
joke with an ethnic punchline?
Adam Hodges Myerson
trd...@dejazzd.com wrote on 1/28/03 9:20 PM:
I almost went looking for your guns right then and there, to finish you off
myself.
See what happens when guns are around? I almost killed you, and you didn't
even realize how close to death you were.
Then, when I had to watch that train show video your kids were watching, I
almost went for your guns so I could shoot myself.
Adam
Bruce Johnston
and a scuffle ensured where the two cops pulled out pepper spray and sprayed
him. He became so angry that he literally beat the dogsnot out of both
police, left them lying there on the ground and split on foot. I remember
reading about it in the paper. Both male police officers too. I wouldn't
trust pepper spray as an end all solution. It does piss people off and
probably causes adrenaline to flow. As for animals I would think they are
afraid of what they don't understand. I would tend to think animals would
flee after getting sprayed. But on the other hand I saw a film crew in
Alaska try to intimidate a extremely large polar bear and it didn't work.
The bear make a point show them that he was boss no matter what, and the
bear wouldn't back down even after several shots over his head. Animals are
unpredictable.
Bruce-
--------------------------------
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringion...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:NIGZ9.13692$ni5.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Bruce Johnston
That's why I took up martial arts for years. I figured that would give
enough security and I wouldn't need a gun. Nowadays martial arts training
only offers secondary protection against guns. I wouldn't test my skills
against guns, I would rather play it down and avoid disputes at all costs.
You never know how crazy some guy might be. Especially if he is an expert
with guns and you don't know it. You lose!!
B-
---------------------------------
"Tom Kunich" <tku...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:tQGZ9.1216$Wu1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Tom Kunich
news:DTGZ9.1648$N5.9...@nnrp1.ptd.net...
>
> Remeber Bob Lunden popping the balloon
> with the snub-nosed .38 at 200 yards?
He must have been aiming at 45 degrees from horizontal. One of my most
vivid memories from childhood was holding a snubby and shooting it out
into the field with a 30 degree elevation or so. I'll bet that wad
cutter didn't go more than 150 yards to where it kicked up dust.
Bikerecker
protection, and he occasionally carries it on solo rides. Most of the time, he
carries bear spray, though, and frequently uses it on the dogs that run freely
in the areas where we ride.
Over the last few years, a kid (now 19) in his neighborhood thought it was good
fun, and impressive to his fellow scum friends, to hassle Richard while he was
riding through the neighborhood. He only did this when Richard was alone, and
only when the punk was surrounded by friends. AS the kid got older, his abuse
worsened. At one point, he swerved his car at Richard, and threatened to kill
him more than once. This was an almost daily occurrence last Summer. The
police, when called, did nothing, even though they new the punk from his
lengthy record. Their comment, the last time Richard called them, was that
the kid really needed a serious ass whipping. After one particularly egregious
incident, Richard rode home, got his gun, and drove back up the street to
confron the kid and his gang. He says it took all his restraint to keep the
gun out of sight, unused. He called the police, again.
The kid had been arrested and served time, but never for anything serious. Hhe
would disappear for a few weeks or months, then resurface. Imagine having to
share your neighborhood (a middle- to upper-middle class neighborhood in the
well off part of Knoxville) with such a menace. Richard agonized for two years
over how to react; we all did, coming up with various fantastic, grandiose
schemes to teach the kid a lesson or maybe knock him off. The kid had nothing
to lose, though, and we all have families, and lives, and things to live for,
so we restrained ourselves.
Two weeks ago, in the middle of the night, the kid broke into another house in
the neighborhood. The home owner had a high powered rifle at the ready, and
shot the kid, who made it out of the house and over two fences before
collapsing and dying in a backyard just down the street. It was several hours
before the body was discovered.
Subsequent investigation revealed that the shooter's daughter had been raped by
the kid and some of his friends. The police are now working on the premise,
indicated by several interviews with friends of the rape victim, that the
shooting was a setup, in which the punk had been lured into the house somehow
to meet the justice of the justifiably enraged father.
The father did what we fantasized about: he took things into his own hands and
blew the worthless piece of shit away. He may end up going to jail for 1st
degree murder, although, if any premeditated murder was ever justifiable, this
elimination of an irredeemably evil shell of a human was.
This chain of events has been the cause of intense, profound discussion among
the group of us that ride and race together with Richard. Richard, who was
most directly menaced by the kid, now feels that he might have had some small
sliver of worthwhile humanity in him, and that the killing was wrong.
I remain ambivalent.
Greg Miller
Adam Hodges Myerson
Kunich at tku...@earthlink.net wrote on 1/28/03 9:09 PM:
Much like the guy from CSC, maybe you should see the movie before you prove
yet again what an ass you are. If you did, you'd know it's not an anti-gun
movie, and in fact, Michael Moore is a gun-owning member of the NRA.
But you'd never take the time to educate yourself about an issue, now, would
you? That would get in the way of you spouting off what little you know
about so very much, and entertaining everyone on RBR so thoroughly.
One my greatest moments in RBR is when I realized that Waddell had replaced
me as your "fast racer fetish object." Please don't ruin that for me.
Do any bike racing lately, Tom, that you might like to share with this fine
bike racing forum?
Adam
Kurgan Gringioni
Don't forget to mention the drawbacks. Crimes of passion, accidental
shootings. Most murders are committed by friends or family. Guns are not a
panacea for crime. Neither is gun control.
steve
NIGZ9.13692$ni5.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net, "Kurgan Gringioni"
<kgringion...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Large cannister pepper spray has its advantages in the home. The homeowner
> has home field advantage - he/she knows where everything goes. Run into the
> next room, stick the pepper spray around the corner and the would-be-burglar
> is screwed.
Screw that............... Who wants to fuck up their shit spraying pepper
spray all over their own house!!
> The shoot-first-ack-questions-later policy can be used w/
> impunity and with no chance of blowing away friends, relatives or neighbors.
Huh???
What kind of Å‚friends, relatives or neighborsË› be doing going through my
Å‚LockedË› house in the middle of the night??
>
> It has its advantages on the bike too. Imagine pulling up to a pickup truck
> w/ rednecks and filling up the cab w/ pepper spray.
>
Or filling it with buckshot....
--
steve
aKGZ9.13693$ni5.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net, "Kurgan Gringioni"
<kgringion...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's directly related to the density of the population.
>
> In rural areas (low density), gun ownership is generally not a problem.
agreed
>
> In metropolitan areas (high density), gun ownership is a problem.
>
>
Disagree.........
Gun ownership (i.e. LEGAL) is not a problem
CRIME (i.e. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY) is!!!!!!!!
Crimes committed w/guns are OVERWELMINGLY down with "illegally owned" guns
Why the hell do whiny ass liberals try to put the blame on an inanimate
object????
Brian Trdina
YOU'RE SUCH AN ASSHOLE. NOBODY DESERVES TO DIE, AND ALL LIVES ARE
WORTHWILE. MAYBE IF YOU AND YOUR ASSHOLE FRIENDS WOULD HAVE JUST TALKED TO
THAT PREDATOR COMPASSIONATELY IN A LOVEING, CARING MANNER AND HAD HIM
EXLPLAIN WHAT ISSUES IN HIS CHILDHOOD WERE LEADINING HIM TO HIS ANTISOCAL
BEHAVIOR HE'D BE ALIVE TODAY. THERE ARE NO BAD PEOPLE OUT THERE, EXCEPT THE
ONES THAT ARE MEMBERS OF THE NRA AND OTHER SUV-DRIVING, MEAT-EATING
REPUBLICANS!
"Bikerecker" <biker...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030128230938...@mb-fa.aol.com...
Brian Trdina
"steve" <st...@printemp.com> wrote in message
> Screw that............... Who wants to fuck up their shit spraying pepper
> spray all over their own house!!
>
Yeah, you're much better off cleaning up blood stains and picking peices of
organ out of your carpet 3 days later when the cops have collected all the
evidience!
Dan
>
> Yeah. If I didn't have kids, I'd probably keep a pump action shot gun
> around for just such a situation. Any malcontent who can listen to the pump
> action being worked without shitting his pants is either really dumb or
> really loaded.
I always get a laugh when guys in action movies repeatedly work the
action on their guns...better get that gun fixed if you need to cock
it so many times per shot.
Lance Indurain
>
> with american defense system:
> 1 rem 1100 12guage
> 1 marlin 35 lever
> 1 357
> 1 10/22 ruger
> 1 win 300 mag
> you should see my best friend from frances face when i open the gun
> safe.....he thinks all americans are fucking cowboys....
> hahahahahahh
> we are.............and its fun as shit
Here's the content of my safe:
1. Browning BAR .300 winny mag (topped w/a Leupold 4X10)
2. Browning stainless stalker 30.06 (topped with a Leupold 3X9)
3. Remmington 870 in 12
4. Remmington 870 in 20
5. H&R single in 12
6. Ruger 10/22 (of course)
7. Several Glocks (9mm and 10mm...I really like the 10)
8. Bushmaster A2 variant in 5.56 (.223) w/about 30 pre-ban mags...my
personal fav.
There is only one other sport other than cycling where you can
possibly accumulate more gear...shooting!
Oh yea, I have a nice RCBS reloading bench in the basement...serves
dual purpose as I wax my skating skis there as well.
Lance Indurain
> According to Michael Moore ....
I would not quote Michael Moore for anything when trying to have a
reasonable conversation or discussion about anything of substance.
His work is not very well regarded by anyone on either side of the
spectrum. It really blows...hard.
There are many other thoughtful, scholarly-types who present earnest,
factual arguments on both sides of this issue. Read them and form
your own conclusions.
JTN
this is my point to you earlier BR. even though you are and he was in the
right to kill this human that abused other humans, this guy will pay a life
of misery for it. most of the time its not worth it. however, in his case im
sure he will sleep well at night knowing this piece of shit is gone and one
less he has to worry about molesting his daughter.
but out on a bike ride the altercation between un-armed human and cyclist
with a gun will definately put the cyclist in the big house on the indoor
trainer for about five years.....
JTN
>personal fav.
niiiiiiiiiiiiche.
i almost forgot, rem woodmaster 30-06, elk killin piece of equipment that
is.
i havnt eatan a piece of store bought beef in two years....god its good to
be able to take your own meat off the land.
thank the lord, thank you america.
JTN
"> shootings. Most murders are committed by friends or family. Guns are not
a
> panacea for crime. Neither is gun control.
>
>
right on.
Lance Indurain
Also, unless you're willing to face assailant who has a
> gun with a can of pepper spray, I'd consider it a poor choice as protection
> in the home.
A great choice for home protection would be any quality civilian AR-15
variant, 16" barrel, with the .55 grain FMJ stuff (fragments better
than the .62 gr) Top off that little number with a Surefire
flashlight, a nice laser pointer and a hollogram quick-point scope,
and you are ready to investigate ANYTHING that goes "bump" in the
night! (remember to double tap)
"You can never have too much gear..."
Lance Indurain
TritonRider
>A great choice for home protection would be any quality civilian AR-15
>variant, 16" barrel, with the .55 grain FMJ stuff (fragments better
>than the .62 gr) Top off that little number with a Surefire
>flashlight, a nice laser pointer and a hollogram quick-point scope,
>and you are ready to investigate ANYTHING that goes "bump" in the
>night! (remember to double tap)
>
>
>"You can never have too much gear..."
>Lance Indurain
I sincerely hope this is a troll. This is so incredibly wrong for so many
reasons it's incredible.
Bill C.
Kurgan Grungioni
>
> > The shoot-first-ack-questions-later policy can be used w/
> > impunity and with no chance of blowing away friends, relatives or
neighbors.
>
> Huh???
> What kind of Å‚friends, relatives or neighborsË› be doing going through my
> Å‚LockedË› house in the middle of the night??
Most homocides are committed by friends or relatives.
Kurgan Grungioni
Who said anything about gun control or legally owned guns?
What I said is true. In high density areas, gun ownership is a problem, in
rural areas it is not. Most people are killed by friends or relatives and
for whatever reason that sort of thing happens in the city, with guns, far
more often than in rural areas. It is a fact.
I am not offering up any solutions, gun control or otherwise. I am pointing
out what is true. If you have some data that disputes what I said please
offer it up. Otherwise, please turn off the caps lock. It's annoying.
steve
PeUZ9.14453$ni5.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net, "Kurgan Grungioni"
<nom...@spamsucks.com> wrote:
That is what I am trying to say..................duh!!
Then they are not considered "friends".....(don't think too hard)
Kurgan Gringioni
Sorry, you're going to have to spell it out for me. Not everyone can think
at that low a level.
TritonRider
>I sincerely hope this is a troll. This is so incredibly wrong for so many
>reasons it's incredible.
> Bill C.
Sorry to reply to myself, but I just went back through the thread and anyone
who has 2 - 870s and a Glock 10mm knows better.
Bill C.
heather halvorson
Kurgan Grungioni wrote:
>
>
> Most homocides are committed by friends or relatives.
>
> http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
i don't think that reference is a good one for the point you are trying
to make. those are stats about race. a better one is
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/intimates.htm#intimates
from that source:
---------------------------------------
Victim/Offender Relationship, 1976-2000
Percent
Stranger 14.0%
Spouse 7.1%
Other family 7.8%
Boyfriend/Girlfriend 4.3%
Other Acquaintance 33.0%
Relationship undetermined 33.8%
-----------------------------------------
Homicides by relationship and weapon type, 1990-2000
Relationship of victim to offender
Gun Knife Blunt object Force Other
Husband/Ex-husband 71 % 25 % 2 % 1 % 2 %
Wife/Ex-wife 69 13 4 7 6
Boyfriend 47 45 3 2 4
Girlfriend 57 19 5 11 8
Nonintimate 63 18 5 7 6
-------------------------------------------
heather
Kyle Legate
> What I said is true. In high density areas, gun ownership is a problem, in
> rural areas it is not. Most people are killed by friends or relatives and
> for whatever reason that sort of thing happens in the city, with guns, far
> more often than in rural areas. It is a fact.
>
Perhaps this is the reason that Canadians do not kill each other with
guns to nearly the same extent that Americans do--most gun ownership
occurs in areas that would be considered rural.
... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
leg...@mcmaster.ca Kyle Legate leg...@hotmail.com
Tower of Tongues:Thursday PM:10:30-11:30 EDT:http://cfmu.mcmaster.ca
moon musick:ritual:IDM:experimental(electronica):minimalism:glitch
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...
steve
VGUZ9.14471$ni5.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net, "Kurgan Gringioni"
<kgringion...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> "steve" <st...@printemp.com> wrote in message
> news:BA5D54A6.2028D%st...@printemp.com...
>> On 1/29/03 9:32 AM, in article
>> PeUZ9.14453$ni5.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net, "Kurgan Grungioni"
>> <nom...@spamsucks.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "steve" <st...@printemp.com> wrote in message
>>> news:BA5CB8E6.20224%st...@printemp.com...
>>>>
>>>>> The shoot-first-ack-questions-later policy can be used w/
>>>>> impunity and with no chance of blowing away friends, relatives or
>>> neighbors.
>>>>
>>>> Huh???
>>>> What kind of Å‚friends, relatives or neighborsË› be doing going through
> my
>>>> Å‚LockedË› house in the middle of the night??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Most homocides are committed by friends or relatives.
>>>
>>> http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That is what I am trying to say..................duh!!
>>
>> Then they are not considered "friends".....(don't think too hard)
>
>
> Sorry, you're going to have to spell it out for me. Not everyone can think
> at that low a level.
>
>
Yea right...
That is what "Henry Chang-Bang" Mensa boy used to say.............
If you cannot figure it out then it was SARCASM. . . . .
G. Focker
> organ out of your carpet 3 days later when the cops have collected all the
> evidience!
Here's a few friendly tips for you guys from someone in the industry:
1) the above statement from Brian is a good reason to invest in wall
to wall carpet, good crime scene techs will usually cut out soiled
sections for evidence, making clean up easier AND if the blood is
caused by your justifyable shooting of a burglar you may be able to
recoup the cost of the carpet by suing the estate of the bad guy or
even claim it on your homeowners or renter insurance.
2) Our Canadian friend Kyle was partly correct, Home invasions are
intentional acts based upon the preceived business endeavors of the
intended victim (ie; scumbag). A "home invasion" commited on an
elderly person (or other seemingly non-scumbag) however is NOT a home
invasion, they are usually termed Burglary / Robberies, which means
exactly the same thing but it's the industries way of separating the
two types of victims.
3)Having used OC (pepper spray), tazers, CN/CS, batons and even guns,
I'd say that while it's your right to possess and use them (which I
support) don't be so sure you're safe by having one. In fact, a great
percentage of violent crime victims are killed with thier own weapons
or because the "upped the stakes" by pulling one. Even the best
trained people fall victim to this. No one likes to be a victim, but
sometimes (the majority of times infact) you're actually more likely
to survive by being passive, again I'm not saying I like the idea but
the facts support it.
4) using OC spray for defense on a bike sounds pretty funny, *Note to
self, never spary forward while in motion* I did have an idea for a
fogger that mounted to the rear of the bike activated by a level on
the bars, but I dropped that idea after I got my upgrade to cat 3, if
they outlaw radios they'd surely look down on that. BTW, OC is an
inflamitory agent, ANY goal oriented individual intent on achiving
his/her goal, can fight through the effects of OC, this is the very
reason smart cops don't use OC on trained pit bulls and I'd guess that
a pissed off grizzly intent on chowing down on your chamios, might do
the same. Moral, OC is good shit when used on something that might be
inclined to give up or run away but it won't stop those intent on
winning, The air tazer is the ONLY less lethel tool I've ever seen /
used that WILL immediately stop any attacker when used right (please
don't site the rodney king case here, wrong unit, poor use)but you
can't use one as a citizen sorry.
5) Kyle, the reason canadians don't have a fascination with guns like
"Mercans" do is because your government won't allow guns in the
country till the national average blood alcohol is below .20%. Hell
half the candain cops are'nt even carrying heaters, what the hell kind
of civilized shit is that anyway?!?!?
FOCKER
your tax dollars at work baby!
Kurgan Gringioni
> >>
> >> That is what I am trying to say..................duh!!
> >>
> >> Then they are not considered "friends".....(don't think too hard)
> >
> >
> > Sorry, you're going to have to spell it out for me. Not everyone can
think
> > at that low a level.
> >
> >
>
> Yea right...
>
> That is what "Henry Chang-Bang" Mensa boy used to say.............
>
> If you cannot figure it out then it was SARCASM. . . . .
My apologies then.
Clearly, not everyone is capable of thinking at the stratospheric heights
you occupy.
heather halvorson
"G. Focker" wrote:
>
> The air tazer is the ONLY less lethel tool I've ever seen /
> used that WILL immediately stop any attacker when used right (please
> don't site the rodney king case here, wrong unit, poor use)but you
> can't use one as a citizen sorry.
i didn't know that. they sell them online supposedly-
http://www.detercrime.com/shopping/shopitems.asp?itemtype=tkit&prodtype=Taser Kit and Guns&prodcol=800080&pic=images/tasertop.jpg
are you saying it's illegal to use one in self defense? i'm confused.
what do you think about stun guns? i either need some kind of weapon, or
i need to find another job, and i like my job..
heather
Ken Papai
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni.
don't worry... Steve is the only brilliant member
of RBR -- all others are complete morons...
(kill-file the brilliance of Steve and the air will
clear and you'll see an nice opening and now Sprint dammit!)
-Ken
Lance Indurain
> Is this acceptable???
I have three nipples, is that acceptable?
z
> "BBC3" <w_b...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:V1GZ9.73930$VU6....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > "A gun in the home is four times more likely to be involved in an
> > unintentional shooting, seven times more like to be used in a criminal
> > assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely to be used to commit or
> > attempt a suicide than to be used in self-defense."
> >
> > Kellerman, Arthur L., et. al. "Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the
> > Home."
> > Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection, and Critical Care. Volume 45, No. 2.
> > August 1998
> > ---------------------------------------------
>
> The kellerman study (a favorite reference by the gun control crowd) only
> counted cases where the gun was acutally fired as a 'uses in self defense.'
Half a truth. The Kellermann 1986 study (a favorite reference of the
Kellermann bashing crowd) did. The followup study in 1993 looked at
the simple question: did homes where there was a gun present have a
higher, lower, or unchanged risk of domestic homicide. The raw data
showed a higher risk of homicide, over all subgroups of the population
(criminals, upstanding citizens, white, black, history of violence, no
history, etc.) and the final result was an independent overall 2.7X
increase in risk of domestic homicide from having a gun present in the
house, after factoring out criminal history, history of violence,
alcohol abuse, illegal drugs, and many other factors. The risk was
entirely from an increase in domestic/family/romantic type shootings,
where somebody familiar with the house and with the gun shoots
another. There was no effect on risk of homicide from forced
intrusions, increase or decrease. The added risk was greater for guns
kept unlocked and/or loaded. No big surprise.
> In the vast majority of cases where a firearm is emloyed in a defensive
> capacity, merely showing the potential attacker the gun is enough to difuse
> the situation.
Kind of bogus. Where are you getting this data from? If it is the
famous 98% bandied around and now claimed by John Lott, be aware that
there is serious doubt. The survey he now claims to have done to get
this figure (after claiming that it came from other researchers'
surveys but being proved wrong) but lost due to computer crash, shows
no other signs of having existed; and at best, would have had a total
of about 25 defensive gun uses, out of his claimed sample of 2,424
individuals surveyed, if you believe Kleck's 2,500,000 DGUs yearly
(which itself is way overinflated). If you can explain how you can get
a 98/2 percentage breakdown out of 25 individuals, you get a prize.
You're at least way ahead of Lott, who hasn't been able to.
>Also, comparing guns used in suicides with guns used in
> defense of crimes is comparing apples to oranges.
Well, not exactly, but I see what you mean.
>
> The most well-reasearched evaluation of the effects of gun posession on
> crime rates was done by John Lott (a University of Chicago Economist), and
> it concluded that, in virtually every case examamed, increased civilian
> posession of firearms results in lower rates of violent crime (title: More
> Guns, Less Crime www.amazon.com). Perhaps the most telling aspect of the
> book is that Lott was personally favored gun control until he performed the
> research that led to its publication.
Again, something claimed for Lott, although I haven't heard him say it
himself. How odd, since in everything else he is an extreme
libertarian, even to the point of arguing that laws against crime in
general may not be as beneficial to society as letting some crime
exist. Before you jump to his defense and accuse me of character
assassination, note that he has in the last week admitted to having a
Usenet pseudonym under which he engaged his critics in debates
regarding his research, and also tried to bolster his defense of his
questionable survey. Posting under a pseudonym is not a problem, but
using the pseudonym to engage in academic battles with your critics
rather than doing so openly sure is, and attempting to pose your alter
ego as independent corroboration is definitely not cool. He denied it
for a while but finally owned up, which must have taken guts.
>Of couse, its much simpler for his
> critics to demagogue the issue than it is to try to understand and
> subsequently employ sound statistical methods to analyse the available data.
Ahh bull. This has been treated again and again. Lott's work is very
complex and each complication can be a source of error. He makes
varied assumptions that are questionable but inevitably aid his case;
for instance, he lumps the effects of concealed carry loosening
together for all states, and also doesn't address the question of the
different periods of time snce the various states instituted CCW
loosening. As a result, it's clear that what is happening is mostly
that Florida, a large state which relaxed CCW early on and had a drop
in violent crime, is carrying the whole study, along with a little
help from middlesized Georgia which also loosened CCW early and had a
drop, and big TX which came on board later and also had a drop in
crime. But most of the states that relaxed CCW showed no decrease and
often an increase in violent crime afterwards, if you treat them
individually and not as part of one big CCW-relaxed whole. And there
is no overall constancy between types of crime; some states have
increased murder and decreased rapes, some the other way around, etc.
He theorizes that criminals are afraid of being shot and will transfer
their business to nonviolent crime like auto theft, but his biggest
effect overall is on rape, suggesting that fear of armed victims is
causing rapists to give up rape and become auto thieves, more than
armed robbers. He finds a similar decrease in crimes on men and women,
when it's mostly men who are getting CCW permits not women, and on
childrem as well when no children are allowed CCW permits. And when
one looks at the actual numbers, you see that the numbers of crimes
stopped by an armed victim is miniscule; a dozen reported in Miami,
compared to 100,000 arrests by police. Even if you assume 90% aren't
reported, it's still trivial, to see such a big effect on crime. He
comes out with some very odd results, such as the violent crime rate
being not very sensitive to the number of young black males, but
highly sensitive to the number of elderly black females. If you don't
believe that to be valid, then you can't pick other results of the
study, such as more guns less crime, to be proved.
> Its also remarkable that some of the country's leading medical journals have
> allowed themselves to be the tools by which poor data analyses masking as
> 'science' are presented to the public.
What's remarkable is that the gun lobby has enlisted so many perfectly
willing lay preachers to go about spreading the gospel about how bad
Kellermann is and how great Lott is, when they clearly don't have clue
one about what it is they are saying; and they have the nerve to call
people who have actually familiarized themselves with the field and
disagree with them, sheep.
>Its a telling commentary on how far
> seemingly rational people (scientists, no less) will go to cling to the
> litany that they've established for themselves as the truth.
Yes, it certainly is, irony intended. Does not bode well for the
future of America that easily led sheep like to arm themselves heavily
and express animosity towards anyone who disagrees with them.