Do you carry?

[Thermodyne]

1) Yes
2) No


I see no reason to carry on a day to day basis. Right to carry is not a right to use same. With the exception of being in your own home, using deadly force would be a bad choice, and cost you some serious money even when you were well within your rights to do so. In this state, you do not have the right to use deadly force, period. Not to mention, that were I to be waylaid by armed perps trying to kill me, a hand gun would not be my weapon of choice.


With all that out of the way, what do you/ would you carry?

I broke in on a 1911/45 then moved to a 1911/10mm, and ended up with a 1911ser80/10mm. It’s not fancy but it is dependable, has manageable recoil and more stopping power than a 357.

[Atrocities]

Thermodyne, I would suggest that you support the Castle Doctrain whenever it is brought before the DC political scene. You as a person should have the right to defend yourself and your family without fear of being sent to prison and or sued into bankruptcy.

Whether you support gun rights or not, you as a person, have the right to self defense and no law should ever take that right from you. We do not live in a run away and hide society, nor should you as an American be forced to abide by any law that keeps your from defending yourself by whatever means you can from a criminal and or criminal activity.

I hate to say it, but this is one of the reasons I left the democratic party and became a republican. I simply feel that an American has the right to be free, and with freedom comes the right to self defense. And I am not just talking about guns, I am talking about the fundamental human right to use whatever means are at his/her disposal to defend against being harmed.

Any politican that supports the run and hide laws should be voted out of office, tarred and feather, and ran out of town on a rail road pike.

Europe limits gun ownership, and they have much lower crime rates. Whether or not this is just a coincidence, I don't know.

I have to respectively disagree with you. Limits on gun ownership really do not have an effect on lowering crime. In fact the opisite is true, gun ownership reduces crime while gun bans and anti-gun laws have been proven to increase crime. Keeping in mind that lawful gun owners are not criminals nor are they anti-moral people.

[Thermodyne]

Atrocities said:
Thermodyne, I would suggest that you support the Castle Doctrain whenever it is brought before the DC political scene. You as a person should have the right to defend yourself and your family without fear of being sent to prison and or sued into bankruptcy.

Whether you support gun rights or not, you as a person, have the right to self defense and no law should ever take that right from you. We do not live in a run away and hide society, nor should you as an American be forced to abide by any law that keeps your from defending yourself by whatever means you can from a criminal and or criminal activity.

I hate to say it, but this is one of the reasons I left the democratic party and became a republican. I simply feel that an American has the right to be free, and with freedom comes the right to self defense. And I am not just talking about guns, I am talking about the fundamental human right to use whatever means are at his/her disposal to defend against being harmed.

Any politican that supports the run and hide laws should be voted out of office, tarred and feather, and ran out of town on a rail road pike.

I have to respectively disagree with you. Limits on gun ownership really do not have an effect on lowering crime. In fact the opisite is true, gun ownership reduces crime while gun bans and anti-gun laws have been proven to increase crime. Keeping in mind that lawful gun owners are not criminals nor are they anti-moral people.

PM about this

[Atrocities]

I have received no PM.

[Morkilus]

I guess this is okay on the OT-est of the OT fora...

But I'm afraid that if this is the main reason for your joining the Republican party, you have been misled much like the religious right. You need to think of what the rest of their actual legislation implies and move beyond the hotbutton topics. You may find out that your ideals may directly conflict with their strategies as revealed in the Patriot Act, the domestic spying scandal, and holding American "enemy combatants" without trial. They may display this one freedom of gun rights as the bait while further building the trap of more governmental control.

I hope I don't lose any friends (or posting privelidges )over this post, but this is something I feel strongly about.

[Atrocities]

I did not join the Rep party because of Guns. I joined them because I saw the Dem party turning into something that I no longer wanted to be a part of.

There are just as many Pro-gun dems as there are reps, so changing the name of the thread to spin a negative attribute is just disappointing.

[PDF]

Atrocities said:
Thermodyne, I would suggest that you support the Castle Doctrain whenever it is brought before the DC political scene. You as a person should have the right to defend yourself and your family without fear of being sent to prison and or sued into bankruptcy.

Whether you support gun rights or not, you as a person, have the right to self defense and no law should ever take that right from you. We do not live in a run away and hide society, nor should you as an American be forced to abide by any law that keeps your from defending yourself by whatever means you can from a criminal and or criminal activity.

I hate to say it, but this is one of the reasons I left the democratic party and became a republican. I simply feel that an American has the right to be free, and with freedom comes the right to self defense. And I am not just talking about guns, I am talking about the fundamental human right to use whatever means are at his/her disposal to defend against being harmed.

Any politican that supports the run and hide laws should be voted out of office, tarred and feather, and ran out of town on a rail road pike.

I have to respectively disagree with you. Limits on gun ownership really do not have an effect on lowering crime. In fact the opisite is true, gun ownership reduces crime while gun bans and anti-gun laws have been proven to increase crime. Keeping in mind that lawful gun owners are not criminals nor are they anti-moral people.

Atrocities, it's *facts* that "disagree" with you : countries were gun ownership is "free" have more violent crimes that the others.
Not surprising though, modern weapons favour attacker. You should wear flak jacket, helmet and IR googles at all times

[Atrocities]

Actually the facts support my statement in that gun ownership here in the US reduces crime. I can only speak to the increased crime rates in the UK, Australia, Canada, and various cities such as WA DC, New York, and Chicogo here in the US following their gun bans as evidence that anti-gun laws do increase crime. Those numbers cannot be disputed as they are fact. The state of firearm ownership and privileges in other countries has tought us a considerable amount about both the value and fragility of our freedoms here in the US.

Notice I said "privileges" and not "rights." The US is one of the few countries in the world where we have a consitutional right to keep and bare arms. Where for the most part the act of self defense is not considered a crime.

[Thermodyne]

Atrocities, it's *facts* that "disagree" with you : countries were gun ownership is "free" have more violent crimes that the others.
Not surprising though, modern weapons favour attacker. You should wear flak jacket, helmet and IR googles at all times

What Europeans call freedom, Americans call intrusive government. The last six months in France are an example of a disarmed society. France’s immigrant population took to rioting in the streets, and there was little that law-abiding citizens could do to protect their property. Then the government tries to align its labor laws a little closer to the norm of the global economy, and it starts all over again. I’d like to see immigrants try to burn down a mid American town over the right to government handouts and jobs. But then I guess France has bigger fish to fry, things like testing nukes, building second rate carriers and maintaining it’s colonial possessions, and lets not forget the effort of holding together a secular state.

I have some French firearms from the late thirties in my collection, seldom fired and only dropped once. That’s sort of the way your government runs, they support whoever agrees to make purchases of French weapons and nuclear technology. Israel was your friend when they were purchasing fighters, but then you turn around and provide their antagonizes with the technology to develop nuclear weapons. It must be easy for a Frenchmen to promote the disarming of the public, having never enjoyed the right to bear arms himself.

As to your statistics, they are only partly correct. Without a breakdown by ethnic group they have only limited value. And that would be politically incorrect in the current climate.

[dogscoff]

I have a set of sword-chucks that I carry around with me. Only had to use them once. Am currently typing this with my nose.