On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 00:21:58 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Exhibits 1 through 1million, gummy's posts demonstrating that
his guns are more important to him than *everything* else. He lacks
the intelligence to put his fear in perspective, and would carry a
main and a backup piece full-time even if he lived on Sesame Street.

Cookie monsters be there ya know. Reckon a guy'd wanna be packin' at
least a .454 Casul in cookie monster country. Tawk about stopping
power...

One assumes that the gentleman is talking about me?

1. Im an ex Army Ranger, two tours in RVN...11B-4. Ive seen the dirty
side of life more than a few times

2. I worked as a Deputy Sheriff for a number of years. Even more of the
dirty side of life

3. Ive used my personal firearm 6 times since those days to protect my
own life and the life of others from armed attack. Being armed and well
trained, and observant has been good enough so far to not require me to
fire a single shot at the bad guys. As well as (its been reported)
exceptionally viscious and evil looking when Im pointing a firearm at an
attacker. I hope that the last time Was the last time...but Ill still
continue to carry..as I hoped Each time was the last time..and they
werent.

4. Im certified by the State of California, the FBI, Homeland Security
and local law enforcement to be qualified to carry a concealed weapon.
California is NOT a shall issue state..and Ive been permitted to carry
for 28 yrs continiously so far. So they,..the trained observers must
see something that the OP doesnt.

5. Ive been a competitor with both rifle and handgun for over 35 yrs. No
accidents to date, and a wall full of awards. And I should mention Im a
certified instructor in combat rifle, combat handgun and combat shotgun.

6. When I dress each morning...I slip on my socks, pants, shirt,
firearm, hat, watch, pocket lint and so forth. 365 days a year....for
well over 38 yrs.

So frankly..the OPs opinion of me means **** in the grand scheme of
things. Perhaps he would care to watch my back for me each and every day
while out and about in the rough and nasty world I live in?

Hummm...but then...what good would he be? I could push him into the
guys with the knives or guns, then run away. Perhaps if I stapled some
$100 bills on him..they would pay more attention to him than me?
Roofing staples might be good...no?

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:21:08 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:

In article
,
rangerssuck wrote:

On Jul 26, 1:21*am, Don Foreman wrote:

Wull yah, and that's good news indeed! * We don't need more *gun
control legislation, *we merely need to collect them *from the
schoolyards and atmosphere *more often. *

And with that, this conversation has come completely full circle. The
original post, if you remember was about a program in Newark, NJ to do
just that. Collect the guns off the streets, at a price of $1k each. I
think it's a good idea. You may or may not.

It isn't a good idea, no matter what one thinks of guns and gun control.

The problem is simple economics -- there are at least 100 million old
guns around, guns that cost no more than $100 to buy. With a 90% profit
margin, the supply will be infinite, and Newark will go bankrupt long
before the supply of guns is detectably affected, never mind
significantly.

Joe Gwinn


There are OVER 300,000,000 privately owned firearms in the US. How many
"over" is not known. A significant number of those may be considered
"war trophys"...a further significant number of which may be banned
firearms..machine guns and so forth. However..one never sees those in
the commission of crimes, because the owners are smart, law abiding and
did I say smart?

Since the Obama election..another 1,500,000 arms have been added to the
publics hands..as well as literally Billions of rounds of ammunition.
Most of those are combat capable arms and ammunition. Yet..the crime
rate continues to fall. Odd no?

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:23:49 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:

One factoid that has stuck with me for
all these years is that 5% of felony accusations are knowingly false. A
major part of the job of prosecutor is to not be misled, to avoid being
used.

Joe Gwinn


Indeed. Throughout the US..its been estimated that at minimum...12%-25%
of those in prison are there for crimes they actually didnt commit.

Now granted..the vast majority of them are there for their second or 3rd
or more visits..but then there are those there for the first
time..hammered into jail for crimes they didnt commit.

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:45:59 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:15:19 -0500, "William Wixon"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Jul 23, 7:28 pm, rangerssuck wrote:

But now that you have it, and I can imagine how it gives you some
sense of security, can you clue me in on the circumstances and
methodology in which you would use it? It seems to me, that if you
were stopped by an armed assailant, you'd be dead before you got the
gun out of your pocket. If the assailant was unarmed, you'd have a
tough time justifying shooting him. If there were multiple assailants,
then what?


Before answering you questions, I need more data. If stopped by an
armed assailant, when did the armed assailant draw his weapon? Was it
150 feet away? Was it twenty feet away? Was it less than five feet
away? Was the assailant acting suspiciously? Was the assailant armed
with a gun? Was the assailant armed with a knife? A sword? If the
assailant was unarmed, did he flee when you drew your weapon? Or was
he crazed on drugs, and ignored your warnings?
If there were multiple assailants, were there two, twenty, two
hundred? What avenues of escape did you have? Would shots have drawn
help?

And what makes you think I would carry a concealed weapon in my
pocket?

Having a concealed weapon definitely gives you more option, but one
always has to consider the circumstances.


Dan



that's what i thought of the link don posted about the lady who got beat up.
seemed to me the guy sucker punched her, even if she was carrying a puny
popper he still woulda taken her by surprise, it would've stayed in her
pocket, or holster, or whatever and she woulda still got beat up. has
seemed to me in the past the odds are so incredibly low guys who carry guns
will ever use them to defend themselves against an surprise assailant the
only real reason to constantly carry a gun is so they can feel confident to
loudly voice their opinions in social situations because if/when it came
down to it they'd always be the one who ends up winning the argument.

b.w.

There certainly are plenty of examples of exactly what you assert.

In the case of the assaulted lady in St Paul, recall that the
assailant demanded money, was told she didn't have any, started to
leave and then returned to beat the crap out of her with his cane. She
had ample opportunity to access a weapon and ample provocation to do
so as well.

I certainly don't assert or imply that things would have turned out
better if she'd had a gun in her purse. (I'll leave that to the
NRA.) She may have a strong abhorrance of firearms or she may not be
cabable or motivated to gain any proficiency with one.

It was an isolated incident, as was the little girl that got struck
and killed by lightning the same day.

A pocket pistol is indeed about useless against a surprise assailant
or ambush. I've stated that before.

I recommend books and writings by Masaad Ayoob for your further
edification. If you would rather write uninformed opinion, I respect
your right to do so.

This of course does NOT address the US Government figures that firearms
are used for self defense 900,000-1.5 million times PER YEAR.

Yet...despite there being 90,000,000+ gun owners in the US..only 35,000
homicides occur yearly (and the number has been falling)..the vast
majority of them being criminals who kill other criminals. And suicides.

So it appears that few shots are fired, yet the bad guys run away.
Would they still run away if the victim pulled out a slice of toast and
gave them a warning to leave?

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:29:26 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:28:56 -0700 (PDT), rangerssuck
wrote:



I'd also like to hear how CCW would have prevented the death of my
friend's cousin:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/nyregion/20car.html

Thinking more about your questions, I recalled some material I
recently read about tactics (methodology) when in a stationary car
and attack seems imminent.

Obviously, if it's possible to drive away, do so. If it is not
possible to move the car (and you are armed), get out of the car and
keep the car between you and the threat. If/when they see that you
are armed, there's a good chance that they will reconsider. If they
don't, at least you now have the ability to move and/or the tactical
advantage of cover.

Elsewhere in the book he addresses the matter of maintaining a state
of alert awareness appropriate to one's situation and surroundings.
Other books also address this issue, some more thoroughly.

The author noted that being in an immobile car places one at a huge
disadvantage because there is so little freedom of motion. GET OUT OF
THE CAR.

If you're interested in learning more, the book is:
"Armed Response: A Comprehensive Guide to Using Firearms for
Self-Defense" by David Kenik. Available from Amazon.
http://tinyurl.com/lspszd


A rather good book btw.

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:48:20 -0400, Wes wrote:

Don Foreman wrote:


Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.

Today was interesting. I walked out to my car, walking around the rear of it as I
normally do to get into the drivers side. Sat down, turned on the mp3 player, started the
car, put it into reverse and backed up, looking up in rear view mirror.

The look of the woman's horror of seeing my car coming at her car offset my shock to see a
car behind me all of a sudden on my 200ft private drive.

The second shock was a member of a religous sect that thought it was so important for my
soul to block some one they could see was leaving his home so they could hand out their
little tract was standing next to my car door.

In less than 30 seconds someone got inside my zone where I felt perfectly safe. I was a
gentlemen, told the guy I need to be some where, took his tract, and watched him depart.

I'm more irritated by my lack of awareness than his rudeness in blocking my egress.

Wes


Condition White..or the Drone State. A bad but easy state to be in.
Learn to go into Yellow before you open the front door.

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:29:14 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:37:03 -0700, Hawke wrote:



The point that you miss is that if you don't have it you have no options
whatsoever. If an assailant wants you dead, you're dead. If he wants to
make you do things you don't want to do, you will do them if a gun is
pointed at your head. You're right about one thing though. Having a gun
doesn't guarantee you anything.

I would suggest that pulling a gun in those circumstances is likely to
guarantee your getting shot. But what do I know?

Obviously not enough.



Mark Rand
RTFM

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:32:38 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:


'Twas a serious thought and is followed by a serious question:-
If a victim is robbed/mugged at gunpoint and offers no resistance, what are
the probabilities of getting shot/not getting shot?

We don't have the direct experience on this side of the pond to any great
extent, since even ownership of a hand gun can get you five years of free
accommodation at Her Majesties pleasure. Use of it in furtherance of a crime
gets you a longer holiday away from society.


regards
Mark Rand
RTFM


Yet in the UK..you have how many gun arrests and shootings each year?

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:37:18 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:35:40 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:32:38 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:


'Twas a serious thought and is followed by a serious question:-
If a victim is robbed/mugged at gunpoint and offers no resistance, what
are
the probabilities of getting shot/not getting shot?

We don't have the direct experience on this side of the pond to any great
extent, since even ownership of a hand gun can get you five years of free
accommodation at Her Majesties pleasure. Use of it in furtherance of a
crime
gets you a longer holiday away from society.

I can't authoritatively answer that other than that it is considerably
higher than zero. The risk is greatest if the assailant is already a
twice-busted felon because a third conviction could get him life as a
habitual criminal. Therefore, for him anyway, the assault or robbery
carries about the same penalty as homicide and killing any witnesses
may reduce his risk of being caught and convicted.


The data on this point is available. I don't recall it well enough for a
quote, but my recollection is that your chance of being shot if you put up
resistance (including resistance with a gun) is slightly *lower* than if you
put up no resistance.

That's a statistical conclusion and it would be worth investigating it
further. Nevertheless, it's suggestive of the efficacy of being armed in
self-defense.

It's consistent with Ayoob's assertion/observation that predators
seek easy prey. The assailant may disengage, flee and seek easier
prey if credible resistance is presented before any actual crime has
been committed.

FWIW, and to avoid confusing anyone who thinks I'm arguing the opposite,
this has nothing to do with the availability or propensity of criminals to
use a gun. That's a whole other kettle of fish, and the experience of the UK
and most continental European countries contrasts sharply with that of
countries where there are lots of guns available to nearly anyone who isn't
a criminal or insane -- such as the US. (Of course, guns are readily
available here to criminals and to the insane, as well.)

No ****! I watched "60 Minutes" tonight which billed a segment
something like "a sector that is flourishing in a down economy: guns
and reloading" They did touch on the economics a bit (prices are up)
but it was mostly about how easy it is for anyone at all to get guns,
including assault rifles, at gun shows in Virginia with no background
check. One person interviewed said it was as easy as buying a candy
bar. Yikes! That isn't a loophole, that's a gaping gash.


Whats an "assault rifle"? and why is it different than buying a .22?

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:48:00 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:15:24 -0500, RBnDFW
wrote:



You do realize that 60 minutes has the same credibility as Spongebob
Squarepants, right?

Probably less. Spongebob doesn't have an agenda. Still, I doubt that
they falsely asserted that background checks are not done at gunshows
in VA. Balanced reporting would perhaps also show how things are
done in other more responsible states.

I go to gunshows regularly here in Texas. They are all crawling with
uniformed LEOs and plainsclothes LEOs of indeterminant stripe, just
hoping some private seller will sell a firearm to one of the few
gang-banger types that sometimes are present. I have yet to see or hear
of any arrests at or near a gunshow resulting from selling a firearm to
an inelligible buyer. And you know if it happens at all it would be
headline news in every major paper.
Fact is, 80% of the sellers in a gunshow are FFLs. They probably
account for 95% of the firearms for sale. Buying a firearm without
filling out a 4473 at a gunshow is a low-percentage pursuit. But even
then, the private sellers are careful. Most ask for a Texas CHL.
It is much easier to buy or sell a firearm in a private transaction
resulting from an online ad. And most people still take the same
precautions about who they sell to. You can get a feel about who is
responding to your ad before the conversation advances very far.

In MN one must present a purchase permit or CCW to buy a gun,
including at a gun show. Getting either permit requires an FBI
background check.



In most states...one can simply sell from one person to another, without
any checks. Most of those states have low crime rates btw.

Get a grip G

Gunner


'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:25:18 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:


Yup. Time enjoyably spent. .380 ammo and brass are about impossible
to find right now but I'm hoping that situation will eventually
improve.


You...you...you dont handload?????????

When you handload for the .380, with cast bullets..its about $2 a box,
even if you buy precast bullets. Its under $5 with hollowpoints.


Geeze!!

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

I'll bet Mark is shaking his head over this conversation. Ranger's views are
closer to those of most Europeans -- maybe halfway between them and
traditional American views -- who have been highly successful in reducing
gun violence to a cipher,


One should note..that Europe has ALWAYS had much less violence, of any
sort or with any weapon than most places on the planet.

So "reducing gun violence to a cipher" is simply a bull**** comment of
the worst sort. Misleading and frankly..a lie.

It should be noted as well...that British Gun Crime is rising sharply
and has been since the Ban. A metoric rise in fact.

The UK was always ..always a far gentler place than most other
places..and was even more gentle when the men and women carried
firearms.

London in 1880..where any and everyone had a pocket pistol..had 10
murders in the entire year.

What was it .last year?

G

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:19:46 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:15:44 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:07:50 -0500, the infamous Don Foreman
scrawled the following:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:59:27 -0700, Hawke
wrote:

My take is that as someone who shoots handguns all the time it is a
pleasant way to pass time. But I shoot at an indoor range most of the
time. Whenever I am able to get outdoors or to an outdoor shooting
facility I find that shooting a handgun isn't all that fun. Their range
is too short for anything. The minute I'm outside I want to shoot a
rifle or a shotgun. So it's probably a matter of convenience more than
anything else shooting handguns. If you can shoot outside most people
are going to prefer shooting a long gun. The problem is in most places
these days finding places convenient to shoot outdoors isn't all that
easy. That's even for me and I live in a county with a population of
only 220,000. Which is why I shoot handguns so much more often. It's
just a lot more convenient, in addition I think it takes a lot more
ability to hit something with a handgun than a long gun so you have to
practice a lot more with handguns than long guns.

Hawke

Last summer, while at an outdoor rifle range, the fellow at the bench
next to me was shooting a S&W .460 revolver at targets 100 yd
distant. He was maintaining about 4" groups with it.

Wow! Scoped or bare iron sights?

Scoped.

2.5" 6 shot groups with a Ruger Security 6, .57" 5 shot group with TC
in .357 Herret. at 100 yrds

Shrug

Gunner


'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:48:10 -0400, Wes wrote:

I keep meaning to buy a decent compact 9mm,

Star BM if you can find one. $150 or so

Mini 1911 in effect

Gunner with x of them....G



'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:32:38 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:


'Twas a serious thought and is followed by a serious question:-
If a victim is robbed/mugged at gunpoint and offers no resistance, what
are
the probabilities of getting shot/not getting shot?

We don't have the direct experience on this side of the pond to any great
extent, since even ownership of a hand gun can get you five years of free
accommodation at Her Majesties pleasure. Use of it in furtherance of a
crime
gets you a longer holiday away from society.


regards
Mark Rand
RTFM


Yet in the UK..you have how many gun arrests and shootings each year?

9,803 total "firearms offenses" (2007-2008, annualized). That includes guns
that are fired, used as a blunt instrument against a person g, or used in
a threat.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs08/hosb0708.pdf (page 74)

That compares with 388,897 (2006) actually used in a murder, robbery, or
aggravated assault in the US.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/...uncrimetab.htm

There appears to be no separate data available for "threats" in the US. But
for comparison, 5,036 of those in the UK were recorded as "threats," and
1,550 were cases where the gun was "used" but with no injury. My guess is
that adding up all of the categories of gun crime in the UK (9,803) will
produce something comparable to the total gun crimes recorded in the murder,
robbery, and aggravated assault categories in the US. The robberies,
particularly, often involve a threat with no actual use of the gun.

You can get the population figures and do the per-capita without any
trouble. But a rough cut is that the per-capita incidence of gun crimes in
the US is 8 times higher than in the UK. The ratios of injuries and deaths
are much higher in the US.

Refine that to the degree you feel necessary. d8-)


Gunner

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:12:24 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 00:21:58 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Exhibits 1 through 1million, gummy's posts demonstrating that
his guns are more important to him than *everything* else. He lacks
the intelligence to put his fear in perspective, and would carry a
main and a backup piece full-time even if he lived on Sesame Street.

Cookie monsters be there ya know. Reckon a guy'd wanna be packin' at
least a .454 Casul in cookie monster country. Tawk about stopping
power...

One assumes that the gentleman is talking about me?

T'was the previous poster that referred to you. I merely commented
on what might be a suitable carry on Sesame Street.

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:31:43 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

Gunner

A sticking point is that many or most are unwilling to live in
condition yellow even temporarily and see no need to ever do so. You
will never convince them otherwise with rhetoric, statistics or horror
stories. They may well be right in their particular location,
circumstances and situation at this point in time.

I respect their choice for themselves. All I ask is that they respect
my right to choose differently and not presume to make my choices for
me since I demonstrably present no peril or threat to any peaceful
person.

I ask that politely as a fellow man, not as a supplicant.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...


I'll bet Mark is shaking his head over this conversation. Ranger's views
are
closer to those of most Europeans -- maybe halfway between them and
traditional American views -- who have been highly successful in reducing
gun violence to a cipher,


One should note..that Europe has ALWAYS had much less violence, of any
sort or with any weapon than most places on the planet.

In 1900, the mean murder rate for most of Europe was approx. 2.0/100,000.
For the US, 1.2/100,000.

http://www.ijcv.org/docs/2008/eisner.pdf (table 3, pl. 297)
http://www.geocities.com/tents444/geohomicide.htm (search on "timeline")


So "reducing gun violence to a cipher" is simply a bull**** comment of
the worst sort. Misleading and frankly..a lie.

Focusing just on murder rates with guns, to keep it simple, Western European
countries run from less than 1/20th the rate of the US (the UK) to around
1/6 of our rate (Switzerland, the gun-toting and firearm-murder capital of
Europe. g)

Take another look at:

http://www.ijcv.org/docs/2008/eisner.pdf

....this time, at the graph on pate 299. You'll see that northern Europe was
a violent place until the late 1800s, but that the murder rates dropped
further after the wave of gun restrictions in the early 1900s. This
contradicts a lot of the gun-site b.s. that's copied and pasted around the
Web. Crime rates in general took an upturn around 1960 and have risen
sharply since then. The ultra-nationalists in various countries have
produced several screeds that tie the increasing levels of violence to the
increasing amounts of immigration in almost every country. They're right,
but the cause and effect isn't really that simple.

You've got to get your head out of the gun sites and start looking at real
statistics, Gunner. You can't even tell the difference between truth and
lies anymore.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:51:00 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:48:00 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:15:24 -0500, RBnDFW
wrote:



You do realize that 60 minutes has the same credibility as Spongebob
Squarepants, right?

Probably less. Spongebob doesn't have an agenda. Still, I doubt that
they falsely asserted that background checks are not done at gunshows
in VA. Balanced reporting would perhaps also show how things are
done in other more responsible states.

I go to gunshows regularly here in Texas. They are all crawling with
uniformed LEOs and plainsclothes LEOs of indeterminant stripe, just
hoping some private seller will sell a firearm to one of the few
gang-banger types that sometimes are present. I have yet to see or hear
of any arrests at or near a gunshow resulting from selling a firearm to
an inelligible buyer. And you know if it happens at all it would be
headline news in every major paper.
Fact is, 80% of the sellers in a gunshow are FFLs. They probably
account for 95% of the firearms for sale. Buying a firearm without
filling out a 4473 at a gunshow is a low-percentage pursuit. But even
then, the private sellers are careful. Most ask for a Texas CHL.
It is much easier to buy or sell a firearm in a private transaction
resulting from an online ad. And most people still take the same
precautions about who they sell to. You can get a feel about who is
responding to your ad before the conversation advances very far.

In MN one must present a purchase permit or CCW to buy a gun,
including at a gun show. Getting either permit requires an FBI
background check.



In most states...one can simply sell from one person to another, without
any checks. Most of those states have low crime rates btw.

Most states have low crime rates? Sounds like Lake Wobegone where all
children are above average.

One can sell to another without checks about anywhere, including MN.
There are legal implications to that but scofflaws don't worry about
such truck.

Do you advocate more stringent controls?

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:49:21 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:37:18 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:35:40 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:32:38 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:


'Twas a serious thought and is followed by a serious question:-
If a victim is robbed/mugged at gunpoint and offers no resistance, what
are
the probabilities of getting shot/not getting shot?

We don't have the direct experience on this side of the pond to any great
extent, since even ownership of a hand gun can get you five years of free
accommodation at Her Majesties pleasure. Use of it in furtherance of a
crime
gets you a longer holiday away from society.

I can't authoritatively answer that other than that it is considerably
higher than zero. The risk is greatest if the assailant is already a
twice-busted felon because a third conviction could get him life as a
habitual criminal. Therefore, for him anyway, the assault or robbery
carries about the same penalty as homicide and killing any witnesses
may reduce his risk of being caught and convicted.


The data on this point is available. I don't recall it well enough for a
quote, but my recollection is that your chance of being shot if you put up
resistance (including resistance with a gun) is slightly *lower* than if you
put up no resistance.

That's a statistical conclusion and it would be worth investigating it
further. Nevertheless, it's suggestive of the efficacy of being armed in
self-defense.

It's consistent with Ayoob's assertion/observation that predators
seek easy prey. The assailant may disengage, flee and seek easier
prey if credible resistance is presented before any actual crime has
been committed.

FWIW, and to avoid confusing anyone who thinks I'm arguing the opposite,
this has nothing to do with the availability or propensity of criminals to
use a gun. That's a whole other kettle of fish, and the experience of the UK
and most continental European countries contrasts sharply with that of
countries where there are lots of guns available to nearly anyone who isn't
a criminal or insane -- such as the US. (Of course, guns are readily
available here to criminals and to the insane, as well.)

No ****! I watched "60 Minutes" tonight which billed a segment
something like "a sector that is flourishing in a down economy: guns
and reloading" They did touch on the economics a bit (prices are up)
but it was mostly about how easy it is for anyone at all to get guns,
including assault rifles, at gun shows in Virginia with no background
check. One person interviewed said it was as easy as buying a candy
bar. Yikes! That isn't a loophole, that's a gaping gash.


Whats an "assault rifle"? and why is it different than buying a .22?

Gunner

Some assault rifles are, in fact. .22 caliber: .223 to be precise,
5.56 mm. That would include the popular AR-15.

".22" out of context generally infers the .22 rimfire that is the
first rifle for many boys, fun for shooting targets and squirrel
hunting.

Assault rifles are semi-auto or full-auto but full-auto isn't nearly
as easy to purchase legally because it costs a lot to do it legally.

Assault rifles are not all .22 caliber. They are all at least
semiauto and usually capable of full auto. They are designed to be
used in armed combat as opposed to civilian hunting or target
shooting.

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:56:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:25:18 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:


Yup. Time enjoyably spent. .380 ammo and brass are about impossible
to find right now but I'm hoping that situation will eventually
improve.


You...you...you dont handload?????????

When you handload for the .380, with cast bullets..its about $2 a box,
even if you buy precast bullets. Its under $5 with hollowpoints.


Geeze!!

Gunner

Geeze yerself. What part of "brass" do you not understand? I need
brass to reload. .380 brass is hard to find because .380 ammo is hard
to find so few folks are shooting enough brass for me to buy or
otherwise acquire. I have lotsa plenty brass in 9mmp, .40 S&W and
..45ACP but not in .380.

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 19:19:30 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:48:10 -0400, Wes wrote:

I keep meaning to buy a decent compact 9mm,

Star BM if you can find one. $150 or so

Mini 1911 in effect


Gunner with x of them....G

A good choice if one is comfy with carrying cocked and locked 1911
style.

If you don't set the safety you're about certain to shoot yourself
sooner or later.

If you do set the safety, you're ****ed if you forget to release it
under stress.

No prob for combat troops, SWAT, etc who drill every day, getcha dead
for those who drill monthly or perhaps quarterly.

Ed Huntress wrote:


Focusing just on murder rates with guns, to keep it simple, Western
European countries run from less than 1/20th the rate of the US
(the UK) to around 1/6 of our rate (Switzerland, the gun-toting and
firearm-murder capital of Europe. g)

Take another look at:

http://www.ijcv.org/docs/2008/eisner.pdf


...this time, at the graph on pate 299. You'll see that northern
Europe was a violent place until the late 1800s, but that the
murder rates dropped further after the wave of gun restrictions in
the early 1900s. This contradicts a lot of the gun-site b.s. that's
copied and pasted around the Web. Crime rates in general took an
upturn around 1960 and have risen sharply since then. The
ultra-nationalists in various countries have produced several
screeds that tie the increasing levels of violence to the
increasing amounts of immigration in almost every country. They're
right, but the cause and effect isn't really that simple.

This graph shows homicide rates, but not gun only rates, is there one
that supports your point? Don't other methods go up as gun deaths go
down from gun control?

And what's with Finland? SAD? The UP has lots of Finns and I've never
seen anything about higher levels of violence. They can be a dour lot,
though.

You've got to get your head out of the gun sites

Pun?

and start looking at real statistics, Gunner. You can't even tell
the difference between truth and lies anymore.

I'm having the same trouble, it often seems no one is willing to get
out from behind their agenda and tell you everything, including what
doesn't support their agenda. Lies, damn lies and statistics can show
what you want them to.

David

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 00:22:51 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:31:43 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

Gunner

A sticking point is that many or most are unwilling to live in
condition yellow even temporarily and see no need to ever do so. You
will never convince them otherwise with rhetoric, statistics or horror
stories. They may well be right in their particular location,
circumstances and situation at this point in time.

I respect their choice for themselves. All I ask is that they respect
my right to choose differently and not presume to make my choices for
me since I demonstrably present no peril or threat to any peaceful
person.

I ask that politely as a fellow man, not as a supplicant.



Those that refuse, often wind up as hideous examples of why living in
Yellow is a good thing.

Shrug

Gunner


'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 00:38:32 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:51:00 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:48:00 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:15:24 -0500, RBnDFW
wrote:



You do realize that 60 minutes has the same credibility as Spongebob
Squarepants, right?

Probably less. Spongebob doesn't have an agenda. Still, I doubt that
they falsely asserted that background checks are not done at gunshows
in VA. Balanced reporting would perhaps also show how things are
done in other more responsible states.

I go to gunshows regularly here in Texas. They are all crawling with
uniformed LEOs and plainsclothes LEOs of indeterminant stripe, just
hoping some private seller will sell a firearm to one of the few
gang-banger types that sometimes are present. I have yet to see or hear
of any arrests at or near a gunshow resulting from selling a firearm to
an inelligible buyer. And you know if it happens at all it would be
headline news in every major paper.
Fact is, 80% of the sellers in a gunshow are FFLs. They probably
account for 95% of the firearms for sale. Buying a firearm without
filling out a 4473 at a gunshow is a low-percentage pursuit. But even
then, the private sellers are careful. Most ask for a Texas CHL.
It is much easier to buy or sell a firearm in a private transaction
resulting from an online ad. And most people still take the same
precautions about who they sell to. You can get a feel about who is
responding to your ad before the conversation advances very far.

In MN one must present a purchase permit or CCW to buy a gun,
including at a gun show. Getting either permit requires an FBI
background check.



In most states...one can simply sell from one person to another, without
any checks. Most of those states have low crime rates btw.

Most states have low crime rates? Sounds like Lake Wobegone where all
children are above average.

One can sell to another without checks about anywhere, including MN.
There are legal implications to that but scofflaws don't worry about
such truck.


I live in California..where firearms transfers between private parties
require that the arm be taken to a dealer..both parties fill out
seperate forms, the dealer holds the gun for 15 days and charges you
$35 to hold it. State law.

Ahum...most..er..ah..EVERYbody follows this law of course!!!

Do you advocate more stringent controls?

Stringent controls? Larger safety buttons and slide releases? In some
circumstances, yes.

**** on the State.


Gunner


'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 00:51:54 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:


No ****! I watched "60 Minutes" tonight which billed a segment
something like "a sector that is flourishing in a down economy: guns
and reloading" They did touch on the economics a bit (prices are up)
but it was mostly about how easy it is for anyone at all to get guns,
including assault rifles, at gun shows in Virginia with no background
check. One person interviewed said it was as easy as buying a candy
bar. Yikes! That isn't a loophole, that's a gaping gash.


Whats an "assault rifle"? and why is it different than buying a .22?

Gunner

Some assault rifles are, in fact. .22 caliber: .223 to be precise,
5.56 mm. That would include the popular AR-15.

".22" out of context generally infers the .22 rimfire that is the
first rifle for many boys, fun for shooting targets and squirrel
hunting.

Assault rifles are semi-auto or full-auto but full-auto isn't nearly
as easy to purchase legally because it costs a lot to do it legally.

Assault rifles are not all .22 caliber. They are all at least
semiauto and usually capable of full auto. They are designed to be
used in armed combat as opposed to civilian hunting or target
shooting.


So then an M1 Garand, or a M14 isnt an assault weapon?

Or is a 7059 is?

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/97059

And do they need to be full auto to be an "assult weapon"?

If so, then virtually all of the black guns on the List are not assault
weapons and the List is invalid?


"...the second amendment is not for killing little ducks and leaving
Huey and Dewey and Louie without an aunt and uncle. It is for hunting
politicians, like in Grozny, and in 1776, when they take your
independence away."__ Representative Bob Dornan, US House of
Representatives, January 25, 1995
'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:01:30 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:56:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:25:18 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:


Yup. Time enjoyably spent. .380 ammo and brass are about impossible
to find right now but I'm hoping that situation will eventually
improve.


You...you...you dont handload?????????

When you handload for the .380, with cast bullets..its about $2 a box,
even if you buy precast bullets. Its under $5 with hollowpoints.


Geeze!!

Gunner

Geeze yerself. What part of "brass" do you not understand? I need
brass to reload. .380 brass is hard to find because .380 ammo is hard
to find so few folks are shooting enough brass for me to buy or
otherwise acquire. I have lotsa plenty brass in 9mmp, .40 S&W and
.45ACP but not in .380.


How much do you need? I can send you a care package in a week or two if
I scrounge around in my cabinets and whatnot.

And brass is still readily available on the 'net, albit its once fired.

Gunner

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:17:26 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 19:19:30 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:48:10 -0400, Wes wrote:

I keep meaning to buy a decent compact 9mm,

Star BM if you can find one. $150 or so

Mini 1911 in effect


Gunner with x of them....G

A good choice if one is comfy with carrying cocked and locked 1911
style.

If you don't set the safety you're about certain to shoot yourself
sooner or later.

So you are claiming that Wes doesnt keep his finger off the trigger
until he is ready to shoot?

If you do set the safety, you're ****ed if you forget to release it
under stress.

No prob for combat troops, SWAT, etc who drill every day, getcha dead
for those who drill monthly or perhaps quarterly.

Odd....I dont know of anyone who has shot themselves with a self loader
who thought the safety was still on. Do you?

I only know a few hundred shooters..shrug. None who shot themselves with
a gun that discharged because the safety was off.

Perhaps we know different kinds of people?


Gunner




'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the
person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American,
but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag,
the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Ro osevelt 1907

"David R.Birch" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:


Focusing just on murder rates with guns, to keep it simple, Western
European countries run from less than 1/20th the rate of the US
(the UK) to around 1/6 of our rate (Switzerland, the gun-toting and
firearm-murder capital of Europe. g)

Take another look at:

http://www.ijcv.org/docs/2008/eisner.pdf


...this time, at the graph on pate 299. You'll see that northern
Europe was a violent place until the late 1800s, but that the
murder rates dropped further after the wave of gun restrictions in
the early 1900s. This contradicts a lot of the gun-site b.s. that's
copied and pasted around the Web. Crime rates in general took an
upturn around 1960 and have risen sharply since then. The
ultra-nationalists in various countries have produced several
screeds that tie the increasing levels of violence to the increasing
amounts of immigration in almost every country. They're
right, but the cause and effect isn't really that simple.

This graph shows homicide rates, but not gun only rates, is there one
that supports your point?

That wasn't about my "point." I was contradicting Gunner's "point," which is
that there was no decline in violence in Europe during the years in which
gun control was rolled out. What he said isn't true. If you want to go back
further in time, you'll see that Europe was a very violent place indeed
until the mid-19th century.

As for rates of gun crimes during that time, you'd have to go looking for
the statistics. It isn't easy, and they may not be available for countries
other than the UK, France, and Sweden, all of which were keeping modern
crime statistics from early in the 19th century. I don't know if they kept
firearms data back then. But strained data turned into conveniently packaged
assertions, like Gunner's, can be peeled like a banana.

Now, before anyone flies off the handle, that is NOT evidence that gun
control caused a reduction in crime. It IS evidence that the nonsense that
comes from the gun sites (you can be sure that Gunner never went to an
original source for *anything*), which they've chewed up and regurgitated,
has no recognizable connection to the facts.

Don't other methods go up as gun deaths go down from gun control?

Not necessarily. And don't assume that gun death rates go down as a result
of gun control. You can track rates in the US in good detail, if you wish,
and you'll find that rates tend to go up and down in unison, across methods.

However, where gun control measures are fairly extreme, you'll find that gun
crimes can nearly disappear. What's happened in the UK in recent years -- a
sharp, even extreme increase in gun-related crimes -- doesn't tell very much
about the effectiveness of gun control. More likely, it tells us about the
effects of runaway immigration.


And what's with Finland? SAD? The UP has lots of Finns and I've never
seen anything about higher levels of violence. They can be a dour lot,
though.

If you're going to pick one country, you have to examine its sociological
factors in detail. That's beyond what we can do here. What we can do is look
at aggregates and statistics; a lot of the sociology comes out in the wash.
But you can't isolate one country, including the US, and draw reliable
conclusions about the effects of gun control.


You've got to get your head out of the gun sites

Pun?

Unintentional. d8-)


and start looking at real statistics, Gunner. You can't even tell
the difference between truth and lies anymore.

I'm having the same trouble, it often seems no one is willing to get out
from behind their agenda and tell you everything, including what doesn't
support their agenda. Lies, damn lies and statistics can show what you
want them to.

David

That's right. If someone has an agenda, don't trust their gun control
statistics. FWIW, I'm an NRA member and I lobbied against gun control in
Trenton; I've been a certified rifle instructor and I've been a gun owner
since I was 11. So I'm inclined toward the pro-gun side. But 30 years of
studying the statistics and, 15 or so years ago, having to write based on
conclusions about them, I'm disgusted with the way the statistics are
bandied around by both sides.

--
Ed Huntress

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 05:47:29 -0500, "David R.Birch"
wrote:


and start looking at real statistics, Gunner. You can't even tell
the difference between truth and lies anymore.

I'm having the same trouble, it often seems no one is willing to get
out from behind their agenda and tell you everything, including what
doesn't support their agenda. Lies, damn lies and statistics can show
what you want them to.

David


Real stats?

Hummm...lessee here....
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html

The above, breaks out the firearms and non firearms homicide rates
rather clearly btw.......

The narrative above the table says almost exactly what I said in my last
message. In other words, your conclusions are so much bunk.

Also, if you read the international crime literature, you'll see that using
these varied sources of data for comparison is far from reliable.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:31:43 -0700, the infamous Gunner Asch
scrawled the following:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

It's called "being awake and aware". I wish more people tried it at
least once in their lives. Lemmings and drones, all, wot?

--
STOP LIVING LIKE VEAL
-----------------------

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:23:49 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:

One factoid that has stuck with me for
all these years is that 5% of felony accusations are knowingly false. A
major part of the job of prosecutor is to not be misled, to avoid being
used.

Joe Gwinn


Indeed. Throughout the US..it's been estimated that at minimum...12%-25%
of those in prison are there for crimes they actually didn't commit.

Estimated by who, using what method?

My instinct is that this is high by a factor of five or ten.


Now granted..the vast majority of them are there for their second or 3rd
or more visits..but then there are those there for the first
time..hammered into jail for crimes they didn't commit.

It certainly happens that the law catches up with people on the second
or third try, at which point there is little doubt that the defendent in
question should not be loose on the streets, whatever the details of the
case at hand.

I don't know how one really can determine the true miscarriage- of-
justice rate, and prove that the resulting number is correct beyond
reasonable doubt, despite all the breathless media pieces.

Without compelling proof, there is no way to tell whose number is
correct. And, more to the point, no way to settle the debate.

Joe Gwinn

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:31:43 -0700, the infamous Gunner Asch
scrawled the following:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

It's called "being awake and aware". I wish more people tried it at
least once in their lives. Lemmings and drones, all, wot?

As Don says, condition yellow is the natural state for rodents and brightly
colored little birds. If you're human and you're going to do it, make sure
you have a good supply of Tums and that you lay off the chili peppers. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 11:41:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:31:43 -0700, the infamous Gunner Asch
scrawled the following:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

It's called "being awake and aware". I wish more people tried it at
least once in their lives. Lemmings and drones, all, wot?

As Don says, condition yellow is the natural state for rodents and brightly
colored little birds. If you're human and you're going to do it, make sure
you have a good supply of Tums and that you lay off the chili peppers. d8-)

Varying state of alertness appropriately according to environment and
situation really isn't unnatural or unduly stressful. Reasonably good
drivers do it routinely, being more alert in heavy traffic than when
cruisin' down the freeway with the nearest next car 500 yards distant.
I exclude those ultra-urban types who are oblivious even in
fast-moving traffic, expecting all others to look out for them as
they yak on their cellphones.

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 04:49:23 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 00:51:54 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:


No ****! I watched "60 Minutes" tonight which billed a segment
something like "a sector that is flourishing in a down economy: guns
and reloading" They did touch on the economics a bit (prices are up)
but it was mostly about how easy it is for anyone at all to get guns,
including assault rifles, at gun shows in Virginia with no background
check. One person interviewed said it was as easy as buying a candy
bar. Yikes! That isn't a loophole, that's a gaping gash.


Whats an "assault rifle"? and why is it different than buying a .22?

Gunner

Some assault rifles are, in fact. .22 caliber: .223 to be precise,
5.56 mm. That would include the popular AR-15.

".22" out of context generally infers the .22 rimfire that is the
first rifle for many boys, fun for shooting targets and squirrel
hunting.

Assault rifles are semi-auto or full-auto but full-auto isn't nearly
as easy to purchase legally because it costs a lot to do it legally.

Assault rifles are not all .22 caliber. They are all at least
semiauto and usually capable of full auto. They are designed to be
used in armed combat as opposed to civilian hunting or target
shooting.


So then an M1 Garand, or a M14 isnt an assault weapon?

Or is a 7059 is?

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/97059

Hm! Good points. Here is one definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 04:51:03 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:01:30 -0500, Don Foreman


Geeze yerself. What part of "brass" do you not understand? I need
brass to reload. .380 brass is hard to find because .380 ammo is hard
to find so few folks are shooting enough brass for me to buy or
otherwise acquire. I have lotsa plenty brass in 9mmp, .40 S&W and
.45ACP but not in .380.


How much do you need? I can send you a care package in a week or two if
I scrounge around in my cabinets and whatnot.

And brass is still readily available on the 'net, albit its once fired.

Gunner

I'd like 1000 or so, should hold me for a while. .380 is easy to lose
in even recently-mown grass outdoors. Once-fired brass is fine.
"Range sweepings" (not cleaned or deprimed, mixed mfr) is OK.

None of the net sources I've used in the past have any .380 except
perhaps a couple that want insane prices like $100/1000.

On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 10:39:15 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

So I'm inclined toward the pro-gun side. But 30 years of
studying the statistics and, 15 or so years ago, having to write based on
conclusions about them, I'm disgusted with the way the statistics are
bandied around by both sides.

Figures don't lie, but liars figure.

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 04:54:58 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:17:26 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 19:19:30 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:48:10 -0400, Wes wrote:

I keep meaning to buy a decent compact 9mm,

Star BM if you can find one. $150 or so

Mini 1911 in effect


Gunner with x of them....G

A good choice if one is comfy with carrying cocked and locked 1911
style.

If you don't set the safety you're about certain to shoot yourself
sooner or later.

So you are claiming that Wes doesnt keep his finger off the trigger
until he is ready to shoot?

If you do set the safety, you're ****ed if you forget to release it
under stress.

No prob for combat troops, SWAT, etc who drill every day, getcha dead
for those who drill monthly or perhaps quarterly.

Odd....I dont know of anyone who has shot themselves with a self loader
who thought the safety was still on. Do you?

No. Not a single one. Which merely suggests that those who carry
1911's cocked remember to set the safety.

I only know a few hundred shooters..shrug. None who shot themselves with
a gun that discharged because the safety was off.

Do you know any who had a tense moment when they forgot to release the
safety? I know *of* one, a Navy Seal. Didn't know him personally but
I believe the source. He had a hairy moment there.

Perhaps we know different kinds of people?

Ya think? G

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 11:41:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:31:43 -0700, the infamous Gunner Asch
scrawled the following:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:50:05 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

Wrong. One can constantly be doing threat assessment and barely be
aware of it. We needn't worry about those who aren't out to kill us
but it's useful to become aware sooner than later of those who might.
Watch wildlife, found even in the parks of big cities. Try to catch a
robin or a rabbit in your hands.

I really encourage you to do some reading. You're right in that we
can't maintain maximum "condition red" vigilance at all times. The
key is knowing what and who to pay attention to and scale one's state
of vigilence accordingly.


However Condition Yellow can be lived in for life.

It's called "being awake and aware". I wish more people tried it at
least once in their lives. Lemmings and drones, all, wot?

As Don says, condition yellow is the natural state for rodents and
brightly
colored little birds. If you're human and you're going to do it, make sure
you have a good supply of Tums and that you lay off the chili peppers.
d8-)

Varying state of alertness appropriately according to environment and
situation really isn't unnatural or unduly stressful. Reasonably good
drivers do it routinely, being more alert in heavy traffic than when
cruisin' down the freeway with the nearest next car 500 yards distant.
I exclude those ultra-urban types who are oblivious even in
fast-moving traffic, expecting all others to look out for them as
they yak on their cellphones.

If "reasonably good" drivers do it, it's a natural response to conditions --
the kind of awareness that comes naturally from experience.

I expect that one's level of awareness is hard-wired and a product of human
evolution. That defines the range of "normal" response; it can be shaped by
experience or training. The "condition yellow" awareness sounds more like a
trained response -- something one can achieve through considerable training
and only by a sustained effort. If it differs in any way from one's "normal"
state, it's unnatural by definition and must be trained into one's behavior
through behavioral-conditioning methods (or maybe there's a drug that will
do it. g)

Being skeptical about such things, I'll hypothesize that it's mostly an
illusion to those who claim to practice it; very few people have either the
time or the means to do the required conditioning. Most likely, they just
convince themselves that they've achieved it, when what they've actually
achieved is a temporary state that they can maintain only while it's
uppermost in their minds.

Just a hypothesis, of course. But humans are humans.

--
Ed Huntress