Home Guy wrote:

Guns are not the "great equalizer".

Someone that's too weak (physically, emotionally, etc) to use physical
force to commit a crime can more easily commit that crime by using a
gun.

You're right, and that tactic will generally succeed - until he runs up
against a putative victim who also has a gun. For that reason, "home
invasions" and "kick burglaries" have never been too popular in the south
and west. About the third time (on average) the stink-eyes try that tactic,
they are met with double-barreled Betsy.


At 60, I sure as hell, am not stupid enough to get into a
fistfight with some punk 40 years younger than me.

That presupposes that you always have a gun within easy reach, at all
times, in your home or when out in public. That they're not taken
from you during a struggle, used against you, stolen from you during
these encounters.

Hmm. I DO have a gun within easy reach at all times. I have several handguns
stashed in various parts of the house, I have a concealed handgun license
and always carry one with me.

Let's think about struggles. I do not let a potential assailant get close
enough TO have a struggle. If he refuses my command to "STOP. Come no
closer!" with the next step he sees my gun. Should, however, I am disarmed
by some fluke, I pull my BUG (back up gun).



Guns are not ergonomic replacements for physical ability when
confronted with an un-armed assailant. Your own strength (if you
have it) is something you always have with you, can be used instantly
- reflexively, can't be taken and used against you.

Guns ARE a replacement for physical ability when confronted by an un-armed
assailant.*


When confronted with an armed assailant, there's no garantee that you
won't be shot if you're unarmed. But if you are armed, the
brandishing of your own gun will almost garantee a shoot-out, the
outcome of which is far from certain.

Three times I've been accosted by an armed assailant (twice in the Home
Depot parking lot). Once the assailant had a tire iron, once the assailant
had a piece of a 2x2, and the third time the probable assailant refused to
remove his hands from his pockets. When they were somewhere in the
neighborhood of ten feet from me, I drew my weapon and commanded them to
back off.


I'll just shoot the goblin

You watch too much TV.

You can learn a lot from TV.

"[Shooting team sergeant] Okay, then this is your statement: 'I followed the
suspect to a rear bedroom where he opened the bottom drawer of a bureau. He
withdrew a large-caliber handgun and pointed it in my direction. I, then, in
fear of my life, discharged my service weapon.' "

"[Officer] Yeah, like I said, he went for his piece and I smoked him."


How can you explain that you have the right to own a gun - but
not a machine gun?

There you go being ignorant again
I do have the right to own a machine gun

While I was under the impression that silencers and machine guns were
generally prohibited across the board, it does seem that they are
legal (if not hard to obtain and expensive to own) in some states,
and illegal in others:

--------
* True story. Shortly after concealed handguns became legal in Texas, a
road-rage incident occurred in Dallas stop-and-go traffic. One van driver
rushed to the driver's-side window of the second van, grabbed the driver's
necktie and began pummeling the 2nd driver with his fists. The second driver
drew his (now legal) pistol and canceled the assailant's ticket. The second
driver wasn't even arrested.

There's a humorous coda to this story - at least for me. The first driver
was a TRAINEE, his first day on the job. His supervisor was riding with him
to show him the route. Now imagine the supervisor getting back to the office
and slumping into the break room.

"How's the new guy working out?" some employee might ask.

"KIA, I'm afraid. We need to put the ad back in the paper..."