So do condoms, baby. We also often have DA firing processes, and place our weapons in such a way as to make the chances of a trigger pull infinitesimal.
And keeping a magazine loaded 24/7 is hard on the spring, eventually it will misfire unless you replace it periodically.
I don't keep my magazines loaded. I meant that I keep a round in the chamber when I'm carrying (which definitely isn't 24/7, and isn't 12/5, either).
If you really feel the need to carry a loaded handgun, maybe you should consider switching to a double-action revolver.
I don't understand why anyone with an automatic produced in the last few decades would ever carry for the purpose of self-defense without a round in the chamber.
Because safeties fail, and shooting yourself with a gun you brought to protect yourself from being shot is pretty stupid.
A negligent discharge with responsible use (and I admit, allowing myself to fall asleep with a loaded weapon on my waist in a crowded car isn't responsible use... probably the worst thing I've ever done wrt gun safety, and even then the chances of anything happening were stupendously small) is... eh.
I guess there's a chance of everything. We are talking about mind blowingly small percentages, here, though.
I actually don't understand why people are so unsettled by guns who haven't been. . .you know shot or something.
Gun education is a fantastic thing to have. I do not own a gun. I have never fired a gun. But I sure as hell know a lot about them. Seems like the wisest thing to do.
I don't understand why anyone with an automatic produced in the last few decades would ever carry for the purpose of self-defense without a round in the chamber.
Because safeties fail, and shooting yourself with a gun you brought to protect yourself from being shot is pretty stupid.
A negligent discharge with responsible use (and I admit, allowing myself to fall asleep with a loaded weapon on my waist in a crowded car isn't responsible use... probably the worst thing I've ever done wrt gun safety, and even then the chances of anything happening were stupendously small) is... eh.
I guess there's a chance of everything. We are talking about mind blowingly small percentages, here, though.
Well, the chances aren't that small, and you got to prepare for the worst. You only need to slip up once, so better safe than sorry etc.
Much of the same reason why you always treat a gun like it's loaded, no matter if you just took out the bullets or just unchambered the last round.
SarksusATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered Userregular
edited August 2009
Studies would have to be done, but I don't see the chances of needing a gun in self defense to be much different than the chances of a weapon malfunction.
Over-and-under double barreled shotguns is the tits. I love it when you open it and the spent shells fly out. It's almost more fun than actually shooting.
Studies would have to be done, but I don't see the chances of needing a gun in self defense to be much different than the chances of a weapon malfunction.
Weapon malfunction by user error or weapon malfunction?
DasUberEdward on
0
Options
SarksusATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered Userregular
it seems very gauche in the main to talk about a thing for killing people with
To be fair, in Norway you're not allowed a gun if all you're going to do with it is kill people. You gotta have a hunting license, or collectors license and a membership of a gun club, and do it for sport. So it's not really the same. Very few people get shot here.
Studies would have to be done, but I don't see the chances of needing a gun in self defense to be much different than the chances of a weapon malfunction.
Weapon malfunction by user error or weapon malfunction?
Initially I was thinking the former, but probably both combined.
Either seem to be legitimate risks by those who carry who are unable to risk the chance of a confrontation without a weapon.
it seems very gauche in the main to talk about a thing for killing people with
To be fair, in Norway you're not allowed a gun if all you're going to do with it is kill people. You gotta have a hunting license, or collectors license and a membership of a gun club, and do it for sport. So it's not really the same. Very few people get shot here.
Very few people who legally own guns shoot people here.
DasUberEdward on
0
Options
BobCescaIs a girlBirmingham, UKRegistered Userregular
I don't understand why anyone with an automatic produced in the last few decades would ever carry for the purpose of self-defense without a round in the chamber.
Because safeties fail, and shooting yourself with a gun you brought to protect yourself from being shot is pretty stupid.
A negligent discharge with responsible use (and I admit, allowing myself to fall asleep with a loaded weapon on my waist in a crowded car isn't responsible use... probably the worst thing I've ever done wrt gun safety, and even then the chances of anything happening were stupendously small) is... eh.
I guess there's a chance of everything. We are talking about mind blowingly small percentages, here, though.
Well, the chances aren't that small, and you got to prepare for the worst. You only need to slip up once, so better safe than sorry etc.
Much of the same reason why you always treat a gun like it's loaded, no matter if you just took out the bullets or just unchambered the last round.
The chances really are that small, in my opinion.
I take that (again, very tiny) chance because I like the presence of mind of having a loaded firearm. Not having a chambered round diminishes that presence of mind.
I'm not trivializing the importance of gun safety. Just... with modern firearms, the redundancy is pretty total. I'd be marginally safer by carrying without one chambered, but I'd be more than marginally impaired if it came to the point where I'd ever have to fire my weapon in defense.
...
Now, of course, the likelihood of me ever having to fire my weapon in defense is just as absurdly low as the likelihood of me misfiring my weapon while it's holstered and safetied. This is all elementary. No sore feelings or anything, Squirms. Nobody here seems to be angry or interested into turning this into a a gun thread. We're just talking about safety and stuff.
If it'd make you feel better though I'll change the subject. Sorry dude.
I think Norway has more guns per person than the US.
let's not go all out of context statistics in this thread m'kay
It's just an interesting aside. When I read that I thought "what, no-one I know has any guns at all! Oh except my farmer friend. They have seven. And my uncle, he has five. Oh."
Studies would have to be done, but I don't see the chances of needing a gun in self defense to be much different than the chances of a weapon malfunction.
Hah, I pretty much made the same point in my last post without reading this.
it seems very gauche in the main to talk about a thing for killing people with
To be fair, in Norway you're not allowed a gun if all you're going to do with it is kill people. You gotta have a hunting license, or collectors license and a membership of a gun club, and do it for sport. So it's not really the same. Very few people get shot here.
Very few people who legally own guns shoot people here.
but he's right, it's a fundamentally different thing
norwegians aren't taking out hunting licenses on desert eagles, and I think their carry laws are more restrictive
that's the problem with blanket statistics like "Norway has more guns per capita" and oh god someone go start a gun thread for this shit
Posts
So do condoms, baby.
I don't keep my magazines loaded. I meant that I keep a round in the chamber when I'm carrying (which definitely isn't 24/7, and isn't 12/5, either).
Not a fan of revolvers.
One of the best lines
Yes and no.
Can it be? Yes. Is it usually? No.
the solution is obvious.
Who doesn't talk casually about guns?
A negligent discharge with responsible use (and I admit, allowing myself to fall asleep with a loaded weapon on my waist in a crowded car isn't responsible use... probably the worst thing I've ever done wrt gun safety, and even then the chances of anything happening were stupendously small) is... eh.
I guess there's a chance of everything. We are talking about mind blowingly small percentages, here, though.
Gun education is a fantastic thing to have. I do not own a gun. I have never fired a gun. But I sure as hell know a lot about them. Seems like the wisest thing to do.
yup
keyboard
Looking at my penis I'm pretty sure it, too, was designed with mayhem in mind. I work with what I got, friend.
Getting shot not so much.
yes.
batman is all well and good but we're talking about my soul
Well, the chances aren't that small, and you got to prepare for the worst. You only need to slip up once, so better safe than sorry etc.
Much of the same reason why you always treat a gun like it's loaded, no matter if you just took out the bullets or just unchambered the last round.
The website sucks
But hopefully the food's ok
Most reviews suggest it is ok, if on the 'mostly salty' side, flavor wise.
I HOPE TO ENJOY MYSELF, PITIFUL EARTHLINGS
Canadians too
it seems very gauche in the main to talk about a thing for killing people with
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Weapon malfunction by user error or weapon malfunction?
I loved that episode. It doesn't just go with "guns are bad", it goes with "guns are dangerous and should be handled with respect".
let's not go all out of context statistics in this thread m'kay
To be fair, in Norway you're not allowed a gun if all you're going to do with it is kill people. You gotta have a hunting license, or collectors license and a membership of a gun club, and do it for sport. So it's not really the same. Very few people get shot here.
Initially I was thinking the former, but probably both combined.
Either seem to be legitimate risks by those who carry who are unable to risk the chance of a confrontation without a weapon.
Very few people who legally own guns shoot people here.
Now to read the actual content
The chances really are that small, in my opinion.
I take that (again, very tiny) chance because I like the presence of mind of having a loaded firearm. Not having a chambered round diminishes that presence of mind.
I'm not trivializing the importance of gun safety. Just... with modern firearms, the redundancy is pretty total. I'd be marginally safer by carrying without one chambered, but I'd be more than marginally impaired if it came to the point where I'd ever have to fire my weapon in defense.
...
Now, of course, the likelihood of me ever having to fire my weapon in defense is just as absurdly low as the likelihood of me misfiring my weapon while it's holstered and safetied. This is all elementary. No sore feelings or anything, Squirms. Nobody here seems to be angry or interested into turning this into a a gun thread. We're just talking about safety and stuff.
If it'd make you feel better though I'll change the subject. Sorry dude.
It's just an interesting aside. When I read that I thought "what, no-one I know has any guns at all! Oh except my farmer friend. They have seven. And my uncle, he has five. Oh."
Hah, I pretty much made the same point in my last post without reading this.
*hi-5*
I want to write something. What should I write?
but he's right, it's a fundamentally different thing
norwegians aren't taking out hunting licenses on desert eagles, and I think their carry laws are more restrictive
that's the problem with blanket statistics like "Norway has more guns per capita" and oh god someone go start a gun thread for this shit
Thai
Malaysian
Chinese
etc