Guns Used.....cont

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I would've used a .30 cal on the cock. Hollow point. Watch it asplode!

Get serious.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

[MrJonno]

First, there are other forms of self defense, second, self defense is valid as a response to ANY crime, third, even the slightest degree of risk justifies self defense.

Not thats not the definition of self defence, anyone who thinks it is, is the criminal a threat to society and should be locked up immediately

You may have noticed the pathological character of Seeth's posts?

Mirror image in personality and politics to Anders Breivik, to be honest it one of the reasons I come to this forums. It's like being at a zoo where you can see dangerous animals behind 'virtual' bars. Through most studies show that as long as you keep them talking on the internet you significantly reduce the chances of them going on a killing spree. So its a combination of voyeurism and charity work talking to Seth

[Blind groper]

To Seth who said :

"You falsely assume that every incident of criminality that justifies self defense inevitably results in the murder of the victim."

Actually, no I do not. However, you talk of over 2 million acts of self defense each year. This means 4 million incidents of criminality that justify self defense, in which the victim has no gun to defend themselves. If just 1 in 20 resulted in murder, this would be 200,000 murders each year. This does not happen, which shows the flaw in your illogic.



To Gallstones

Re shooting rooster.

The problem with the over-reaction of using a gun, is that the bullet does not stop moving within a few yards. It keeps going, and can kill someone at a substantial distance. If you had tried that trick in my country, you would have been charged with being a public nuisance, and had to have your day in court. You probably would get away with a severe fine, but repeat offenses would lead to a prison term.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

First, there are other forms of self defense, second, self defense is valid as a response to ANY crime, third, even the slightest degree of risk justifies self defense.

Not thats not the definition of self defence, anyone who thinks it is, is the criminal a threat to society and should be locked up immediately

You may have noticed the pathological character of Seeth's posts?

Mirror image in personality and politics to Anders Breivik, to be honest it one of the reasons I come to this forums. It's like being at a zoo where you can see dangerous animals behind 'virtual' bars. Through most studies show that as long as you keep them talking on the internet you significantly reduce the chances of them going on a killing spree. So its a combination of voyeurism and charity work talking to Seth

He's more a parody of Brevik, because he never means what he says.

[Seth]

First, there are other forms of self defense, second, self defense is valid as a response to ANY crime, third, even the slightest degree of risk justifies self defense.

Not thats not the definition of self defence, anyone who thinks it is, is the criminal a threat to society and should be locked up immediately

So, what crimes may be perpetrated against you without you being permitted to defend yourself, pray tell?

[Seth]

To Seth who said :

"You falsely assume that every incident of criminality that justifies self defense inevitably results in the murder of the victim."

Actually, no I do not. However, you talk of over 2 million acts of self defense each year. This means 4 million incidents of criminality that justify self defense, in which the victim has no gun to defend themselves.

No it doesn't.

If just 1 in 20 resulted in murder, this would be 200,000 murders each year. This does not happen, which shows the flaw in your illogic.

No, it just shows the idiocy of your reasoning.

To Gallstones

Re shooting rooster.

The problem with the over-reaction of using a gun, is that the bullet does not stop moving within a few yards. It keeps going, and can kill someone at a substantial distance. If you had tried that trick in my country, you would have been charged with being a public nuisance, and had to have your day in court. You probably would get away with a severe fine, but repeat offenses would lead to a prison term.

That's what shotguns are for. A .410 would work nicely on a rooster, and the birdshot pellets would not be dangerous to humans for more than about a hundred yards. Besides, she didn't say that she didn't take the backstop into account when executing the rooster.

The best way to get rid of nuisance animals is with a silenced .22 using sub-sonic hollow-point ammunition. No muss, no fuss, no noise. Of course all the applicable safety rules still apply.

I'll have to wait about 6 to 8 months for the BATFE to process the paperwork and send me the tax stamps. I've got a .338 AAC Titan QD can for my TRG-42 and my .30 caliber rifles, a Surefire SOCOM556-RC for my .223 rifles, an Osprey for my .45 H&K's and a .22 Kestrel for my Walther P22 sitting in the dealer's vault till the paperwork clears. No more earmuffs! Yay!

[Seth]

First, there are other forms of self defense, second, self defense is valid as a response to ANY crime, third, even the slightest degree of risk justifies self defense.

Not thats not the definition of self defence, anyone who thinks it is, is the criminal a threat to society and should be locked up immediately

You may have noticed the pathological character of Seeth's posts?

Mirror image in personality and politics to Anders Breivik, to be honest it one of the reasons I come to this forums. It's like being at a zoo where you can see dangerous animals behind 'virtual' bars. Through most studies show that as long as you keep them talking on the internet you significantly reduce the chances of them going on a killing spree. So its a combination of voyeurism and charity work talking to Seth

The world is full of pusilanimous dependent-class wastes of natural resources who think that self defense is wrong. Fortunately, they will soon die off when things get tough because they are incapable of surviving on their own. That's good for the species.

[Blind groper]

So, what crimes may be perpetrated against you without you being permitted to defend yourself, pray tell?

Self defense is fine, but it should be proportionate.
If a person threw a water balloon or a snowball at me, even with malice, it would not be acceptable to turn around and hit them with a length of steel.

That same principle means that, if someone is attacking me with a non lethal tool, like his fist, or a club, then my defense should be sufficient to achieve the purpose of self defense, but no more. Here in NZ, which is a nation with sane self defense laws, you will be charged and very likely sent to prison for using excess force, such as a gun.

No, it just shows the idiocy of your reasoning.

That kind of bland statement is meaningless. If you think my reasoning is faulty, you need to explain why, or else we will regard your statement as having no merit.

[hadespussercats]

It's all about meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee and if you come between meeeeeeeeeeeee and myyyyyyyyyyyyyyy desires I'll shall scweam and scweam until I make myself sick.

FTFY
I bow to your superior knowledge of being a dumb shit and contributing nothing of worth. But that doesn't mean you aren't deserving of medical treatment to deal with your narcissistic personality disorder. And in the interests of public safety perhaps you should consider voluntarily surrendering your right to bear arms until such time as robust psychological testing becomes a requirement for owning a firearm?

aspire1670, the above post and the one linked here constitute a personal attack on another forum member, which is against our rules.

[Gallstones]

To Gallstones

Re shooting rooster.

The problem with the over-reaction of using a gun, is that the bullet does not stop moving within a few yards. It keeps going, and can kill someone at a substantial distance. If you had tried that trick in my country, you would have been charged with being a public nuisance, and had to have your day in court. You probably would get away with a severe fine, but repeat offenses would lead to a prison term.

This college is an agricultural preserve, I was on the ranch as I was the student swineherd.
We shot dogs running the fences all the time.
We also shot livestock on premises for slaughter.


I don't live in your country so whatever would happen there is non sequitur.

Your ballistics lecture is pretentious and also non sequitur.

[Gallstones]

BTW aspire and blind groper and mrjonno et al, yes it is about me and what I want. I don't care about what you want. You are irrelevant to my interests and desires. There is nothing you can do about that.

[aspire1670]

BTW aspire and blind groper and mrjonno et al, yes it is about me and what I want. I don't care about what you want. You are irrelevant to my interests and desires. There is nothing you can do about that.

I would never dream of attempting to change someone so self-absorbed as your good self, Gallstones. But it is symptomatic of your behaviour, and unsurprising, that you think you are the centre of my universe. What is surprising, however, is that even with your monumental self-regard you remain so defensive and needy.

[Jason]

Aspire.. back the fuck off. You don't know anything about Gallstones.

[FBM]

Seems that people who lack critical thinking skills have little choice but to launch personal attacks in lieu of presenting relevant data for consideration. It's adolescent, small-minded and weak behavior. It's also very common on discussion boards, because anybody can get behind a keyboard and start trying to drag down discussions to the playground level, where their only competence lies.

[Bella Fortuna]

Aspire.. back the fuck off. You don't know anything about Gallstones.

This.