Maddogg6

So does insurance - 99% of the time is 'just in case' - right?

Wait - lets jump back BEFORE they enter your house. The REAL protection of a gun starts there - the robber has NO IDEA if anyone in the house is armed - this uncertainty - is beginning to equate to 'probably not' - given all the 'anti-gun' media coverage.
If Im a crook and KNOW there are guns in one house and NOT the other - I would enter the un-armed one first.

most of the protection a gun provides is the 'threat' - just like nukes with russia in the cold war.

The scarriest part for most people is being robbed when they're at home, most would agree that material possessions are of much less value than ones personal safety.

Not everyone has small children - and... they DO grow up also...
Me - well, break in and learn what I may or may not have handy...

I think you watch too much TV - most intruders that are greeted by the owner with a weapon end up; 1) quietly surrendering/running or 2) non-lethal wound (shot in the ass/legs) or 3) dead. in that order - anything else is very rare. The LAST thing most intruders want is to be stuck in a house surrounded by police. Unless they are looking for 'suicide by cop' then - well - nothing would prevent this anyway - unless it was suicide by 'home owner protecting his shit'...

You sure sound like one..

Its common sense really - 'common crooks target the weak - these cowards want 'easy' targets' (police say this all the time) - own a gun and no longer be preceived as weak. And if granny knows how to fire it - she can NOW be a substantial threat to a would be crook/attacker and would no longer be assumed to be an easy target.

Seems more like your not understanding how a gun DOES offer protection.

Here - more kids die in swimming pools than from guns - yup, lets ban swimming pools too.

Maddogg6

ANY gun can be used for self defense - it comes down to 'defense from what?'

Im pretty sure the constitution was signed with paranoia of government abuse - so - automatic weapons would offer a level of personal protection from say a rogue gov't/agency and/or foriegn invasion as a for instance.

For private home invasion protection - you grab the shot gun.
For 'neighborhood' invasion - you grab the AK.

Use the right tool for the job at hand...

And just like our nukes - you hope you never need to use it.

TheBlackCat

So you are saying you consider our government to currently be a bigger threat to your safety than a criminal? It is all a matter of where the biggest threat comes from. So far the US government has not tried to take over the country. But criminals do get automatic assault weapons and shoot up neighborhoods. It is the difference between a known, real threat and a very unlikely potential threat. I would prefer to stop the known threat rather than one that may never occur. Besides, even if the government did try to take us over many people would side with the government (otherwise such a takeover would not be possible). A handful of people with assault rifles are not going to make that much of a difference.

__________________
There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.
-H. L. Mencken

IamLakota

I'll just say this about our goverment,if you stop in your tracks to fast the Head of BIG BROTHER will be up your A**!! Black Cat sounds like you need to read H.G. Wells book 1984,and it's getting worse.

__________________
Harley Davidson: If You Have To Ask You Wouldn't Understand!!!

System Specs:
Mobo: eVGA 680i,intel E6600,2x BFG 8800GTOC 512's SLI,2xTracer Ballistic PC 6400 2xWD Velociraptor's 2x74gig WD Raptor ,Soundblaster X-Fi Fatal1ty,Samsung 205bw20" widescreen,Lian-Li PC60 w/window ULTRA X 2 550w SLI READY!,all psu cables re-sleeved w/neon yellow uvcable sleeves,Case modded with 2x 120 fans rear,2x80mm fans front, Zalman cpns 9500 led

TheBlackCat

H. G. Wells!? He was dead before that book was even written. His main works were written about 50 years before 1984 was written. Naturally I know things are bad in the government, but I do not think easy access to assault weapons are a solution. Far from it. These sorts of changes always happen with public support. Therefor having guns won't help much, because most of the people who have them won't use them. In fact it may even hurt, because they could be used against those trying to protect freedom. It would be scarily easy for the government to convince people that those trying to protect freedom are the enemy and get everyday people to use their weapons against such people. Apathy is ultimately the enemy here. Arming criminals is not goint to change that. Educating people is.

__________________
There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.
-H. L. Mencken

hyperl1t3

this is the end all for the "gun control" issue in brief. >any illegal substance is easily to be obtainable no matter whose looking as long as they're determined enough (i.e. mentally unstable). >i agree with licensing and mandatory classes all the way. i learned to shoot a 9mm out in the desert with adult supervision. i was absolutly scared i would hurt someone, but it's like driving a car and should be treated as such. >North America as a whole has an obsession with guns. it's inate in our society and it's violent past so most people kill with guns than other weapons. but most important is we ABSOFRICKINLUTLY NEED A CRACK DOWN ON ALL AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. last time i checked no one in my city was making any militia to defend the shores...