Gun remark makes outdoorsman an outcast

onelongsong

know1 wrote:

If the punishment for committing a car jacking isn't death, how can they justify passing a law that essentially makes it a death sentence....without the appropriate judicial process?

i'm not making any laws. i heard it on the tele.
there was a story on the phoenix fox news this morning about a 60 year old woman that took a gun away from a car jacker and shot him. i've got to run so i can't find the link.
carjacking with a weapon is reasonable cause to believe your life is in danger and deadly force is justifiable.

onelongsong

lucylespian wrote:

We just manage wihout guns. A golf club or a long handles shovel does the job just as well, just without the heroic drama. Knowing how we have a whole range of poisonous critters, isn't it amazing we don't all need a gun to survive the day. Just how many people die in the US from handgun crime each year, and just what percentage of those are killed by first-degree relatives ??

haven't you grabbed a bale of hay and come upon a snake? our horses get bit on the nose a lot. still wondering how you ride with a shovel.

know1

onelongsong wrote:

haven't you grabbed a bale of hay and come upon a snake? our horses get bit on the nose a lot. still wondering how you ride with a shovel.

If the elderly woman is literally about to step on the snake, isn't it a bit dangerous to shoot it out from under her foot?

onelongsong

know1 wrote:

If the elderly woman is literally about to step on the snake, isn't it a bit dangerous to shoot it out from under her foot?

this is where judgment comes in. the snake was at least 4 feet long and because it was moving; it was streached out. so the head was at least 4 feet away from her foot. even at 25 feet; i can knock the head off a cigarette.

Collin

onelongsong wrote:

i understand. i get a little caught up in the moment and don't choose my words wisely.
after everything we talked about; i'd like to tell you why 90% of the citizens SHOULD NOT be allowed to carry a gun. they hesitate to pull the trigger. it takes only seconds for a criminal to disarm you and use your own gun against you. police are taught the 7 yard rule. it takes 7 seconds for the average police officer to draw his gun; aim; and fire. it takes a criminal 7 seconds to move 21 feet and over-power you.
so no; the average citizen should not carry a gun.

A few pages ago criminals were in shock when they were confronted with a weapon. Now you say they'd take that weapon and shoot you.

And I still don't understand why you have to kill them.

know1

onelongsong wrote:

this is where judgment comes in. the snake was at least 4 feet long and because it was moving; it was streached out. so the head was at least 4 feet away from her foot. even at 25 feet; i can knock the head off a cigarette.

Fair enough. I can certainly understand that much more than killing someone over your wallet which I find deplorable.

Jeanie

Collin wrote:

A few pages ago criminals were in shock when they were confronted with a weapon. Now you say they'd take that weapon and shoot you.

And I still don't understand why you have to kill them.

I don't understand why purse snatchers and petty criminals strung out on drugs need to beat old ladies who don't want their bag snatched. Why they find it necessary to kick them, punch them and toss them to the ground breaking bones, causing hideous injury and sometimes even frightening them into an early grave. But it happens doesn't it?

As far as I can see if you are a criminal and this is what you feel you must do to survive, fine, but surely you must expect that sometimes, just maybe the victim may fight back, and just maybe you might not come out of it as well as you'd planned.

Your choice really. If someone is attempting to inflict their shit on you and they come off second best, well maybe that's not such a bad thing sometimes.

Think of it as hazards of the job.

jeffbr

Collin wrote:

And I still don't understand why you have to kill them.

If you are shooting someone, you shoot to kill. Shooting knives out of hands, or shooting kneecaps is the stuff of Hollywood. You aim for center mass, and shoot to kill.

Collin

jeffbr wrote:

If you are shooting someone, you shoot to kill. Shooting knives out of hands, or shooting kneecaps is the stuff of Hollywood. You aim for center mass, and shoot to kill.

I'm not talking about shooting weapons out of hands or shooting kneecaps (though onelongsong can obviously pull it off). There aren't many criminal that will get up after being shot in the center mass and they certainly won't continue to try to steal your wallet. That's Hollywood for you.

I'm done with posting in this thread, the complete disregard for human life here is sickening.

Jeanie

know1 wrote:

I would never do that as I don't believe in it. Just trying to point out a bit of hypocrisy in saying that disobeying the law makes it justifiable to kill someone.

So you don't have self defense laws where you are?

How is defending yourself against an attacker hypocritical?

And please explain to me how you know with a certainty that you will never kill anyone? Psychic are we?

I'm not saying that you will and I'm all for being a pacifist as much as is practical, but the fact remains that people inflict serious harm on other people for shitty things like wallets and the like. Have you ever been in a situation where your life was threatened? And repeatedly? If you have I'm happy for you that you were able to come out of it with your life, sanity and ideals still intact. But if you haven't then might I suggest that you acknowledge unless you have been in the situation you may have no idea how you'd react or what you would do. And everybody acts differently at different times anyway, so what you think you might do and what you actually do are probably two different things. AND what you might do the first time your life is in danger could be very different to what you do the second time.

Not criticizing you, but I really think you need to try to see all points of view in the arguement and stop judging people, as that is what is seems you are doing to me.

jeffbr

Collin wrote:

I'm not talking about shooting weapons out of hands or shooting kneecaps (though onelongsong can obviously pull it off). There aren't many criminal that will get up after being shot in the center mass and they certainly won't continue to try to steal your wallet. That's Hollywood for you.

I'm done with posting in this thread, the complete disregard for human life here is sickening.

WTF are you on about? You asked why they had to be killed. I've never shot someone, and I hope never to have to. I won't go looking for it. But if my life, or the lives of my family members are threatened, I won't hesitate firing on someone. If you can drop them with a center mass hit and they don't die, that's great. My point was that you need to be prepared, if you are going to shoot someone, that the person you are shooting may die.

My post didn't contain any disregard for human life, it contained practical, real self-defense advice.

onelongsong

jeffbr wrote:

If you are shooting someone, you shoot to kill. Shooting knives out of hands, or shooting kneecaps is the stuff of Hollywood. You aim for center mass, and shoot to kill.

true; but you keep in practice by target shooting. exhibition shooting is fun too. my aunt holds the national skeet shooting record. there's a lot of things you can do with a gun besides kill.

jeffbr

onelongsong wrote:

there's a lot of things you can do with a gun besides kill.

Absolutely. With a shotgun I like to kill discs of clay when I shoot trap, and I like to kill pieces of paper on the range with a handgun. That is about all I've killed with firearms in the last 25 years.

Jeanie

Collin wrote:

I'm not talking about shooting weapons out of hands or shooting kneecaps (though onelongsong can obviously pull it off). There aren't many criminal that will get up after being shot in the center mass and they certainly won't continue to try to steal your wallet. That's Hollywood for you.

I'm done with posting in this thread, the complete disregard for human life here is sickening.

Sorry? Where's the complete disregard for human life?

Clearly you have trouble with understanding human nature.

And cause and effect.

Or maybe you are just misinterpreting people on a message board.
Easily done.
Shame you feel that you can't reason your way through the thread and come out with a better understanding of people's points of view.
But then didn't you say that the world is f**ked anyway? So I guess coming from that point of view there is no fixing what's broke in your eyes.
Shame really.
Understanding can change the world.

Jeanie

jeffbr wrote:

Absolutely. With a shotgun I like to kill discs of clay when I shoot trap, and I like to kill pieces of paper on the range with a handgun. That is about all I've killed with firearms in the last 25 years.

I fired a shotgun once. The kick back promptly made me drop it!
Left a huge bruise on my shoulder. And I was not very popular!!

And then same day I got to fire a .22 semi automatic. VERY SCARY gun.
So EASY to use. Too easy. More scary than the shotty. Not many of them around here anymore. Well not legally anyway.

Anyway, I'll never be a gun toting girl. I've tried them and I'm not really a fan of them for me. But I understand they are a necessary tool in some parts of the world.

And I do love to watch the clay target shooting at the Olympics.
Such a skill.

Collin

Jeanie wrote:

Sorry? Where's the complete disregard for human life?

so a kid in an urban area needs to know that if he tries to rob or carjack me; i will shoot him dead.

Killing teens over a wallet. Sounds like onelongsong is quite the humanitarian.

So your wallet and car are worth more than human life?

in a word; yes.

i have no problem killing some scum that attacks me.

A wallet and car are worth more than human life. And he doesn't even have a problem with it. Killing a rotten kid, a walk in the park.

an eye for an eye

Theft = death penalty. This was, by the way, his reply when I asked him if he was a Christian. Yay Jesus!

killing your first person is hard. especially if you look into their eyes. but after that it isn't that bad. when you exterminate vermin; you do society a favour.

Vermin, he admits he has no problem killing punk kids, he considers them vermin and he thinks he's doing society a favour. Well tell that to the 16-year-old thug's mother.

Clearly you have trouble with understanding human nature.

Oh I understand human nature alright.

Or maybe you are just misinterpreting people on a message board.
Easily done.

Is a wallet worth more than a human life?

In a word; yes.

The most expensive wallet I've ever seen was $125. A human life is worth less.

What's your interpretation Jeanie?

Shame you feel that you can't reason your way through the thread and come out with a better understanding of people's points of view.

I'm trying.

But then didn't you say that the world is f**ked anyway?

Ah yes, it's a wonderful world isn't it. Do I have to post some Darfur pictures? Or kids in Iraq? Or how about the story that was on the news yesterday? A mother killed her 5 children.

So I guess coming from that point of view there is no fixing what's broke in your eyes.

I'm doing my best to change it. Too bad the people I'm trying to help are the same vermin onelongsong has no problem killing.

Shame really.
Understanding can change the world.

It certainly can. How big of an attempt does a person make to understand someone when he shoots that person.

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

what's to tell? an elderly woman stepped out of her camper as i was walking by and there was a rattlesnake at the base of her steps. it was moving along but she was about to step on it so i shot it. what's so hard to understand? it's hours to the nearest hospital so a helecopter would have to be called. it would still take an hour each way. the next was a young child who saw the tail and went to pick it up. the next was a young man in his early 20's who was moving some wood around and a rattlesnake came out from behind and he didn't see it. then there was a wonam in her 40's who was walking and not paying attention. she came up on the snake and froze. the snake sat coiled long enough for me to shoot it. lastly was me. i was in the greenhouse watering when i looked down and a small rattlesnake was at my feet. if it wasn't cold that morning he would have bit me by the time i saw him. at that time i was alone without a vehicle.
now knowing you have some of the most poisonous snakes in austrailia; why can't you understand how killing a poisonous snake at your feet would save you? especially in the outback where help is far away?

you have got to be kidding me. ever heard of the words. STOP SNAKE!!!! ?
yeah there are poisonous snake around. and yes here in australia we have some of the deadliest. i would prefer to be aware of my surroundings, to know that i am in the wild and to respect that i am the one out of my element. i wouldn't shoot or harm a snake just cause it's poisonous. and yes i have been in that situation.
i can not condone the use of a firearm against a friggin' snake for crying out loud if there is an alternative.

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

true; but you keep in practice by target shooting. exhibition shooting is fun too. my aunt holds the national skeet shooting record. there's a lot of things you can do with a gun besides kill.

yeah, you can pistol whip the bastards.

lucylespian

onelongsong wrote:

but we were able to fight off england twice. have you forgotten january 26th?

Actually , I think that is a large part of the problem. Because your country was born by success in war, you have stuck with war and guns as being central and essential to your existence.
As someone posting on a PJ board, I thought you might have heard of Evolution, but clearly not. Rooted in the past, rooted in Scripture, you are clearly an Old Testament freak who revels in the thought of being a hero.
I'm inclined to believe you are making up most of the crap you have posted anyway.
Australia does cope without guns in our society. Sport shooting is strictly controlled and so are guns for use on the land. They are used, stored and transported in accordance wiht regulations that make gun crime almost non-existent here.
No guns does equal no gun crime. the fact that you already have so many that you can't realistically get rid of them does not mean that you would not be better off if you could.

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

but we were able to fight off england twice. have you forgotten january 26th?

forgotten what about january 26th?