You guys and your guns...

[SteveB]

Not to mention Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin reclaimed the Shire by using guns after Saruman took it over. That wasn't in the movies though, it was in the book.

[Blind groper]

Our hobbits don't carry guns. The Lord of the Rings, strangely enough, has absolutely nothing to do with guns.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Our hobbits don't carry guns. The Lord of the Rings, strangely enough, has absolutely nothing to do with guns.

Except for the invention of gunpowder.

[Jason]

Remember the Hornburg!

[Blind groper]

The thing is, though, that the book does not mention gunpowder - just a 'blasting fire' supplied by the wizard Saruman. Bearing in mind that he was a wizard, I suspect Tolkien meant it to be a magical weapon.

[SteveB]

Our hobbits don't carry guns. The Lord of the Rings, strangely enough, has absolutely nothing to do with guns.

Maybe the Hobbits didn't...

[mistermack]

It's equally bad to over-estimate one's self.

Aaaw, I think that's a bit harsh.
I don't see how Seth could be expected to avoid that.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The thing is, though, that the book does not mention gunpowder - just a 'blasting fire' supplied by the wizard Saruman. Bearing in mind that he was a wizard, I suspect Tolkien meant it to be a magical weapon.

Assumption.

[pErvinalia]

Considering that most defensive gun uses occur without a shot being fired, how else would anyone know about them? If I've been accosted by a crook, pull a revolver and tell him to fuck off, and he runs off into the night, I'm probably not going to waste the rest of my evening telling the cops about the bad guy who was here just a minute ago but I scared him off. No police report, yet a crime was prevented, and depending on the mental state and intentions of the criminal, harm to myself may have been avoided.

You are accosted by what I assume is a crook without a gun and you considering escalating the situation by bring out a lethal weapon as success. Never mind a civilian doing that if a policeman did that in the UK I would hope he would lose his job and be looking at jail time.

That ideology is so fucked up its beyond comprehension, but you have convinced me of one thing it isnt just guns that are the problem its the attitude of gun owners

Yeah, in your fucking insane world, you just bend over and take it up the ass because paranoia and fear rule your entire life.

I think you've got that the wrong way round. The people who feel they need guns to protect themselves are more likely to be paranoid and fearful than someone who feels like they are adequately safe without owning a gun.

No they aren't. They are, for the most part, realists who understand that criminals are unpredictable and can strike anywhere at any time with lethal effect, as in the case of the Aurora movie theater shooting and every other incident of mass or individual armed attack. Those who think they are "adequately safe" are living in a fantasy world, as testified to by the 50 people killed and injured in that movie theater, not one of whom was armed.

I'm neither fearful nor paranoid about potential criminal attack precisely because I carry a gun, have trained extensively in it's proper use in self-defense situations, and am confident in my abilities to respond in a proper, lawful and timely manner in the event of an attack. I walk where I please when I please and I fear no one. That mental state, one of alert, heads-up preparedness and situational awareness that comes from training and from carrying a gun is reflected in my body language, which criminals are quite adept at reading. That makes them avoid me and seek out the weaker sheeple who walk about with their heads down in a posture of paranoia and fear. Thus, merely training with and carrying a firearm substantially reduces the chances that I will be chosen as a victim by a street thug. And it leaves me prepared to do something, however ineffective it might be, in the event of a deranged active shooter incident. At least people can say I tried to save lives, even if I end up dead. That's a fine testament that I'd be perfectly satisfied with. Hopefully, however, my training and situational awareness will actually allow me to save lives in such a situation, even if it only distracts the shooter for a few moments so others can escape. Seconds count in such situations, and it is not a characteristic of deranged shooters that they are well-trained and disciplined enough to stand there and continue shooting innocent people when someone else...ANYONE else is shooting at them. That sort of courage and self-sacrifice is only seen in those who have trained hard and resolved to stand and fight rather than running away.

This is what the police learned from Columbine and it's precisely why the tactical paradigm for the active shooter is for the first-responding officers to run towards the gunfire and engage the shooter as quickly as possible, even if they cannot be definitively effective in taking him out.

The utility of this paradigm has been demonstrated on several occasions where armed citizens (or in the mall shooting case an off-duty police officer) have intervened to good effect and reduced casualties merely by making the shooter take cover and keep his head down. That was demonstrated as far back as the Texas Tower shooting, where as soon as civilians with high-powered, scoped hunting rifles showed up to augment the police, who were at the time only armed with shotguns and pistols incapable of providing suppressive fire, the shooter in the tower was forced to retreat behind the parapet wall and subsequent casualties were significantly reduced by the suppressive fire.

That's nice. But none of that refutes the silliness of you equating those who don't need guns to being "paranoid" and "fearful".

[pErvinalia]

I am afraid, Seth, that what you have said on this thread makes me think your authorities made a big mistake giving you a gun license. When you say things like "try it and see how long you survive" you are indicating too little inhibition towards using a firearm with lethal effect.

A responsible user of firearms for the defense of himself and other humans should be a person who is exceedingly reluctant to use it. Being over-eager is a recipe for tragedy.

Yeah, that's my view of Seth as well. I think it's a fucking miracle he hasn't shot anyone in the 50 years or whatever that he has been a civilian gun owner. Surely it's only a matter of time till he does it, going by the increasingly violent and bitter opinions he's spouted over the years.

It's not a miracle, its common sense, a mature and rational adult personality, and a lot of careful training, combined with some good luck.

Nobody's going to be shot by me unless they are an imminent danger to myself or others and a lesser degree of force (like threatening them with a gun) would be inadequate to stop the threat.

Or unless they are Marxists invading my country or trying to overthrow the Constitution and government, which I consider an imminent lethal threat to me and everyone else.

Like Obama.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So, this all sorted then?

[macdoc]

Case closed - there is segment of American gun loons that are just plain fucked in the head....

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... edia-storm

close the fucking border and sell the resources to China ....at least they're polite.

[Blind groper]

I propose a new Olympic event, strictly for citizens of the USA. A western style quick draw shoot out, with live ammunition. A genuine 'sudden death' contest. Only the one survivor to get the gold medal.

I nominate Seth to represent Rationalia on this contest. He tells us he has practiced enough.

I have a strong feeling, that if such a contest were announced, there would be a whole lot of people asking to enter.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you guys would say "Seth-type Americans" instead of lumping us all together I would appreciate it.

[Jason]

I propose a new Olympic event, strictly for citizens of the USA. A western style quick draw shoot out, with live ammunition. A genuine 'sudden death' contest. Only the one survivor to get the gold medal.

I nominate Seth to represent Rationalia on this contest. He tells us he has practiced enough.

I have a strong feeling, that if such a contest were announced, there would be a whole lot of people asking to enter.

I'll submit my application with one caveat: There be three competitors - Seth, in favour of 'guns for everyone' [sup]TM[/sup], Myself in favour of rational gun control, and you in favour of the abolishment of firearms. We meet, all three, in a circle at the graveyard of Santa Anna. Weapons are restricted to late civil war firearms.

I choose a Colt Navy Conversion, with Rattlesnake engravings on the grip, naturally.

We meet in one week.

See you there.