# gun recommendations.....



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

here it is in a nutshell. Walked to dinner last night with my girl friend. On the way back we were talking and laughing, having a good time, just screwing around, you know the couples thing. This guy walking the opposite direction says to me, what the **** you laughing at, I said huh?. I didn't even notice him until he approached us. He says why you looking at me laughing? Is there something ****ing funny? It was like he wasn't all there. So he lifts up his shirt and he has a knife down his pants telling me he's going to **** me up. I'm like really?

Just so you know, he's about 5'1" hispanic, small little guy, I'm 6'2" 225. I am a very big dude. Even with a knife, he doesn't have the reach to get near me before I kick him upside his head. Girl friend freaks out and tells me to don't engage him. She calls 911, ***** with the knife take off down 5th court, northbound from Wilshire. Yeah, tough guy was scared of the cell phone.

Anyway, I'm looking for a small gun I can conceal on myself. Maybe an ankle holster ankle or a small side holster. I have zero tolerance for worthless shit of human beings like this. If I had a gun on me, I would've shot him in the arm so he couldn't stab me and would've called the police, while I sat on him waiting for them to arrive.

Meanwhile it took the Santa Monica police about 15 minutes too arrive. They show up and ask questions. At this point I'm irritated. I tell them, you already gave him a 15 minute head start. What's the point? You've got a psycho walking the streets that wants to stab people coz he's firckin' hallucinating and your response time is shit. I said the 911 operator has the details ask her. I leave to go back home. Guess they were busy bull shitting drinking coffee on 3rd st. Too busy to do their jobs. I use to have respect for them, lost a big amount of respect for them last night. Like they were scared of the altercation, so if we wait long enough hell be gone. Don't worry just follow the trail of people being stabbed, eventually you'll catch up with them. Seriously, I lost so much respect for them last night. Next time, it will be a shots fired call. That might get a quicker response time.

So guys,and gals, looking to make the perp hurt really bad, not kill the perp. Cause enough pain so they can't continue the attack. Would prefer an assault charge instead of a murder charge.

recommendations,??? I know they have some small ones in Nevada that aren't legal in California, dont mind getting something from out of state, as it I apparent their is,a lack of law enforcement here in Santa Monica.


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

I'm thinking this one..

http://www.impactguns.com/ruger-lcp-ct-380-acp-wcrimson-trace-laser-3713-736676037131.aspx


----------



## alex589 (Oct 9, 2014)

Walter PPS 9mm my choice for concealed carry and as backup gun, for open carry (job) CZ P-01 9mm. ankle holster good for driving only (my opinion)!

http://www.waltherarms.com/products/handguns/pps/

http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-p-01-9mm-black-alloy-14-rd-mags/


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> I'm thinking this one..
> 
> http://www.impactguns.com/ruger-lcp-ct-380-acp-wcrimson-trace-laser-3713-736676037131.aspx


I like that one, just hitting the perp with the laser should make them tinkle.


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

As my day job, I'm the executive director of the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners, the largest state based gun group in the United States. I carry consistently.

One premise with what you ask is wrong. If you draw a gun and shoot, you "shoot to stop the threat". You never shoot to wound or shoot to scare. You shoot at the center of exposed mass -usually a triangle formed from the shoulders down to the navel. And you only shoot when justified under the laws of your state which typically mean when you or someone else is in immediate danger of death, serious bodily injury and/or rape. Some states without Stand Your Ground laws also require you to flee if possible. Take a pistol safety training class and get your concealed weapons license. This will be explained to you in the class along with the laws of your state. The arm is a terrible target. It moves rapidly and is hard to hit. It also won't stop someone crazed on drugs even if you do hit it. In 95% of defensive uses of a firearm, the gun is never fired anyway. The simple presence of the gun and the "Stop or I'll shoot!" command is enough to end the threat.

As for a gun, the recommendation is that you get the biggest caliber you will carry consistently. For many men, that's a 9mm semi-auto or a .38 revolver. Revolvers carry less rounds but have the benefit in that unlike semi-autos they rarely ever jam and are more fool-proof. I carry a Ruger LCR .38/.357 in a pocket holster. Avoid ankle carry. It's hard to get to. Look for a pistol designed for concealed carry. They typically will have an internal hammer instead of an external one and internal safety mechanisms rather than a slide button on the outside. Regardless of what you carry, get training first. A typical NRA Personal Protection Class will cost $100-$200 depending on the instructor and length of the class.

Note that for others reading this: You carry a pistol for self defense outside the home. Preferably, you use a shotgun with the shortest legal barrel for self defense at home.


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

Good advise Brady but everything OP wants to do is banned where he lives, Concealed is impossible to get and Open is illegal. Anything he does will be illegal. So he may as well go for an illegal weapon as well. May as well get the felony right off the bat!


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

As for carry while Ubering, my firearm comes out of my pocket while in the holster and goes in the side pocket of my door because I'm left handed. It's invisible there to pax. Many right handed people carry store their firearm between the driver's seat and center console or under the driver's seat. There are slim gun safes designed for vehicles for this purpose. In your vehicle, the firearm needs to be quickly accessible. That usually means not carrying on your waist, especially during colder weather when it could be covered by a shirt, a coat and a seat belt.


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Walkersm said:


> Good advise Brady but everything OP wants to do is banned where he lives, Concealed is impossible to get and Open is illegal. Anything he does will be illegal. So he may as well go for an illegal weapon as well. May as well get the felony right off the bat!


Thanks, I missed the fact he lives in California. You're right. Although the federal courts just ruled against California restrictions this week just like they did against Illinois two years ago. Shall-issue concealed carry may be coming to California very soon.

See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...fornia-restrictions-on-conceal-carry-permits/


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

Ubering may be the only place he would be allowed to carry it since that is technically his place of business. Thought Taxi drivers won a case like that.

Yea Shall Issue opened up in OC this past year and San Bernardino has always been pretty lenient. But LA is the tough nut to crack. We just got a new sheriff not sure his stance on it yet.


----------



## alex589 (Oct 9, 2014)

Just showing your gun someone can get you an aggravated assault with deadly weapon ..up to 10 years in prison read your State law first before carry...


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

alex589 said:


> Just showing your gun someone can get you an aggravated assault with deadly weapon ..up to 10 years in prison read your State law first before carry...


Correct. Never draw your gun unless you believe you are justified in using it under the laws of your state. That doesn't mean you need to shoot it. But it does have to be a situation in which you believe you're justified to shoot it.


----------



## MiamiFlyer (Sep 22, 2014)

#1, Yes, "California Legal" is a whole new ballgame when it comes to firearms, but that the same time, it does weed out some of the garbage guns out there. The most important thing about a firearm purchase, is that it is comfortable in your hands, and you can use it well.

#2 Don't carry unless you are legal to carry. District Attorneys, Politicians, and Judges will make examples out of people with illegal guns, or carrying illegally. You will serve time if you have an incident, or it is found on a traffic stop. California is not a gun friendly state.

#3 The gun is for use of deadly force. If your life (or that of someone immediately around you) is not in imminent danger, you better not pull that gun out. You could easily be the one charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon for putting others in fear despite your good intentions.

#4 Hitting an extremity (arm) on a moving object with a handgun, while your under pressure, is insanely more difficult that you think. It gets even harder with a smaller handgun. A shooting incident in real life is nothing like firing at a paper target at the range with unlimited time.
You have to be very weary of what is behind you to. Santa Monica at dinner time is a heavily populated area. When that bullet passes through an arm, or when you miss your shot, where are they going to go? The bullet will continue on its path, striking whatever car, building, or person is in its path. Your also assuming that any kind of attack will stop because you struck an arm. A determined fighter will continue fighting with an injured arm.

#5 Also not a fan of the ankle holster here. If someone comes at you with a knife, you would have to find the time to stop and bend over, stopping and exposing yourself, before you could get in the action with your handgun.

Display of a knife in a pocket or waistband with the comments made would certainly be a threat. However, based on the story described here, the knife remaining in the pocket or waistband, I would not consider this to be an Imminent Threat to you Life where use of deadly force would be justified. (That opinion could sway greatly based on further description of the knife, the distance between you, or if it had been pulled out and/or displayed in an aggressive manner).

Pulling a gun in this case would have escalated things. Better that you went home pissed off, then someone going home with holes in them.
"...but I was just going to hit him the arm" would not be a good statement to make to Police.

The media loves a good gun story, especially when there are different races involved.
Check out this ridiculous headline from Vice and then watch the video...

https://news.vice.com/article/video...ing-man-with-knife-as-he-walks-away-from-them

The number of people citing police brutality when this is a clear threat to the officer's lives is mind boggling. Public Opinion and the Media while not be on your side if there is any questions. Don't become a household name like George Zimmerman.


----------



## Art (Jun 18, 2014)

I would suggest otherwise as no matter what you do with a gun most of the time your guilty (in la county)
But if you really have to...
go with the ruger lcp.385 
3 years ago when I got mine it was only available to law enforcement personnel.
So I had a cop buddy buy it and re-sale it to me.
Im not sure what the conditions are now...
One thing to keep in mind is "if you pull a gun on someone you better have the ball's to pull the triger, because taking about it and replaying a scenario in you head it different then pulling the trigger knowing that you might take someone's life.


----------



## Orlando_Driver (Jul 14, 2014)

I carry a Glock .45 massive stopping power


----------



## Art (Jun 18, 2014)

My bedside gun is a glock 21sf
But way to heavy and big to carry around!


----------



## Art (Jun 18, 2014)

To add to my advice lol
If you do shoot someone, make sure not to shoot them from the back, always shoot to kill as you dont want them to survive and sue the shit out of you and always tell the cops there was 2 of them and the other guy grabbed the gun of the attacker and took off.


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> here it is in a nutshell. Walked to dinner last night with my girl friend. On the way back we were talking and laughing, having a good time, just screwing around, you know the couples thing. This guy walking the opposite direction says to me, what the **** you laughing at, I said huh?. I didn't even notice him until he approached us. He says why you looking at me laughing? Is there something ****ing funny? It was like he wasn't all there. So he lifts up his shirt and he has a knife down his pants telling me he's going to **** me up. I'm like really?
> 
> Just so you know, he's about 5'1" hispanic, small little guy, I'm 6'2" 225. I am a very big dude. Even with a knife, he doesn't have the reach to get near me before I kick him upside his head. Girl friend freaks out and tells me to don't engage him. She calls 911, ***** with the knife take off down 5th court, northbound from Wilshire. Yeah, tough guy was scared of the cell phone.
> 
> ...


Kimber Ultra carry II (all day long)


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Walkersm said:


> Good advise Brady but everything OP wants to do is banned where he lives, Concealed is impossible to get and Open is illegal. Anything he does will be illegal. So he may as well go for an illegal weapon as well. May as well get the felony right off the bat!


Besides uber doesn't really do the background check anyway. So even if I have the felony I can still Uber On!!!

Yeah, California is the most screwed up state, only one who can get guns are the criminals. So your conceal permit is more on the honor system here. Thinking about getting a cheap apartment in Nevada so I can carry an Uzi.

Police are unresponsive, so you're really on your own.


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Brady said:


> Correct. Never draw your gun unless you believe you are justified in using it under the laws of your state. That doesn't mean you need to shoot it. But it does have to be a situation in which you believe you're justified to shoot it.


If I pull it, I'm shooting it. No reason to pull it unless my life is in danger. If I'm at the point of pulling it out, the lead is going into your body. There is no warning. Guy pulled a knife on me, if I had the gun on me, he would've been shot, no questions asked. There was so much anger in his face. He wasn't all there. Would've had no issue shooting last night, talk is cheap, bullets are results oriented


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

LAPD slogan: To Serve and Protect.

Supreme court decision: Police have no constitutional duty to protect a person from harm.

Looks good on the side of the cars though.


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Thank you all for the responses and all of the great information. Headed out to the gun store, seeing what looks good, starting the paperwork, I believe there is,a waiting period, mine as well make some progress today. Look for me in the news, 'optimus uber loses control and unleashes a wave of hurt on criminals, there's a new vigilante in town'


----------



## jakob (Jul 16, 2014)

Dude you should have kicked him in the face, take some fighting classes, feels good to know when someone tries to fight you you can kick the shit out of them... Don't get a gun, sounds trouble, pick a taser or a pepper spray.

And dude you get paid this week??


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

jakob said:


> Dude you should have kicked him in the face, take some fighting classes, feels good to know when someone tries to fight you you can kick the shit out of them... Don't get a gun, sounds trouble, pick a taser or a pepper spray.
> 
> Btw dude you get paid this week??


Yep money came on Thursday.


----------



## jakob (Jul 16, 2014)

@Optimus Uber okay thanks man, time to email Uber.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

GUYS, look at this web site for 9mm all copper shredding ammo, GUARANTEED to stop a criminal in the act. www.g2r*ammo*.com


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> Thank you all for the responses and all of the great information. Headed out to the gun store, seeing what looks good, starting the paperwork, I believe there is,a waiting period, mine as well make some progress today. Look for me in the news, 'optimus uber loses control and unleashes a wave of hurt on criminals, there's a new vigilante in town'


check out www.g2r*ammo*.com/news for ammo. Can use in any small 9mm pistol with devastating results.


----------



## grUBBER (Sep 11, 2014)

Jimmy Lee itagerty said:


> GUYS, look at this web site for 9mm all copper shredding ammo, GUARANTEED to stop a criminal in the act. www.g2r*ammo*.com


What I like about it is that it's lead-free. 
One can't underestimate risks of a long term exposure to toxic metals.


----------



## Fauxknight (Aug 12, 2014)

Brady said:


> As for a gun, the recommendation is that you get the biggest caliber you will carry consistently. For many men, that's a 9mm semi-auto or a .38 revolver. Revolvers carry less rounds but have the benefit in that unlike semi-autos they rarely ever jam and are more fool-proof. I carry a Ruger LCR .38/.357 in a pocket holster.


The LCR in .357 is what I carry as well, most semi-autos just didn't add up to what I wanted unless they were too large. I think just about any of the .38sp carry revolvers are just as good of a choice (Ruger LCR or any of the S&W Airweights).

I also agree that self defense with a gun is not trying to just wing them, one .357 to the center mass and there is a good chance that they aren't ever getting back up. Consider that to the courts the act of claiming self defense is already a guilty plea, but if self defense proves justified then you can not be tried for your acts. Too many other legal issues with leaving someone only injured as well, not to mention the significantly higher chance of missing and where did that bullet go...always be aware of what is beyond your target, but bullets tend to react poorly to non-fleshy objects, either going through them or ricocheting off of them.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> here it is in a nutshell. Walked to dinner last night with my girl friend. On the way back we were talking and laughing, having a good time, just screwing around, you know the couples thing. This guy walking the opposite direction says to me, what the **** you laughing at, I said huh?. I didn't even notice him until he approached us. He says why you looking at me laughing? Is there something ****ing funny? It was like he wasn't all there. So he lifts up his shirt and he has a knife down his pants telling me he's going to **** me up. I'm like really?
> 
> Just so you know, he's about 5'1" hispanic, small little guy, I'm 6'2" 225. I am a very big dude. Even with a knife, he doesn't have the reach to get near me before I kick him upside his head. Girl friend freaks out and tells me to don't engage him. She calls 911, ***** with the knife take off down 5th court, northbound from Wilshire. Yeah, tough guy was scared of the cell phone.
> 
> ...


Cops get busy, and they dont have Surge rates to bring out more Cars out on the road!


----------



## alex589 (Oct 9, 2014)

My bedside gun is a Mosberg 590A1


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> here it is in a nutshell. Walked to dinner last night with my girl friend. On the way back we were talking and laughing, having a good time, just screwing around, you know the couples thing. This guy walking the opposite direction says to me, what the **** you laughing at, I said huh?. I didn't even notice him until he approached us. He says why you looking at me laughing? Is there something ****ing funny? It was like he wasn't all there. So he lifts up his shirt and he has a knife down his pants telling me he's going to **** me up. I'm like really?
> 
> Just so you know, he's about 5'1" hispanic, small little guy, I'm 6'2" 225. I am a very big dude. Even with a knife, he doesn't have the reach to get near me before I kick him upside his head. Girl friend freaks out and tells me to don't engage him. She calls 911, ***** with the knife take off down 5th court, northbound from Wilshire. Yeah, tough guy was scared of the cell phone.
> 
> ...





Optimus Uber said:


> here it is in a nutshell. Walked to dinner last night with my girl friend. On the way back we were talking and laughing, having a good time, just screwing around, you know the couples thing. This guy walking the opposite direction says to me, what the **** you laughing at, I said huh?. I didn't even notice him until he approached us. He says why you looking at me laughing? Is there something ****ing funny? It was like he wasn't all there. So he lifts up his shirt and he has a knife down his pants telling me he's going to **** me up. I'm like really?
> 
> Just so you know, he's about 5'1" hispanic, small little guy, I'm 6'2" 225. I am a very big dude. Even with a knife, he doesn't have the reach to get near me before I kick him upside his head. Girl friend freaks out and tells me to don't engage him. She calls 911, ***** with the knife take off down 5th court, northbound from Wilshire. Yeah, tough guy was scared of the cell phone.
> 
> ...


I'm 6'4" 225lbs carry colt 45 in my pocket without anyone knowing, but I'm in texas , get award for shooting someone, lol. 
A Derringer 22/410 would hurt someone. 
http://www.derringer.de/n-fmjou2.jpg

Good throw away piece.
38 too big = 9mm , small 22 better $30-50 here in Houston


----------



## justabass (Nov 15, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> Besides uber doesn't really do the background check anyway. So even if I have the felony I can still Uber On!!!
> 
> Yeah, California is the most screwed up state, only one who can get guns are the criminals. So your conceal permit is more on the honor system here. Thinking about getting a cheap apartment in Nevada so I can carry an Uzi.
> 
> Police are unresponsive, so you're really on your own.


Why do people think Uber's not pulling a background check?
In July they extended the Castle Doctrine to include your car here in Nashville...no CCP needed to carry loaded firearm in vehicle.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

This gun talk is so alien to us here in the land of OZ.

88 out of 100 Americans have guns. In Australia its only approx 15.

11.5% of homicides here in OZ are by Firearms. Its 60% in the USA.

Homicide by firearm rate per 100,000 pop USA = 2.97 Australia = .14.

There are shootings every night here in Sydney, but thankfully it seems that the criminals are mainly taking out each other.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list


----------



## Fauxknight (Aug 12, 2014)

Those numbers are a little skewed. More guns owned doesn't always mean more homicides, it just changes the weapon of choice. Weirdly the cities here that make gun ownership more difficult are ones host have high gun homocide rates. After all who goes around shooting people in a neighborhood where every other prison is carrying vs a place where nearly no one is likely to be able to return fire.

Note that most countries with an overall well balanced and educated high gun ownership have very low gun violence rate. See Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, France, Canada, and others who rank very high in total ownership, but very low in violence. Gun proponents want the US to be like this, but anti-gun political agendas have ramped our gun violence up to what it is today.

Also you got one of those numbers flat wrong. There are 88 guns per 100 people, not 88% gun ownership. Many people who own guns own more than one, and some people just flat out own a lot of guns.


----------



## Verminator (Sep 12, 2014)

Read "In The Gravest Extreme" by Massad Ayoob.

Required reading for anyone even considering owning a firearm for personal protection.


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

Just remember to get a permit...!


----------



## justabass (Nov 15, 2014)

District of Columbia has the highest rate of gun violence in the US.....it's probably the most restricted state to own a firearm in.


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

sts713 said:


> I'm 6'4" 225lbs carry colt 45 in my pocket without anyone knowing, but I'm in texas , get award for shooting someone, lol.
> A Derringer 22/410 would hurt someone.
> http://www.derringer.de/n-fmjou2.jpg
> 
> ...


Stick with a .45 ammunition like gas is expensive


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

jakob said:


> Dude you should have kicked him in the face, take some fighting classes, feels good to know when someone tries to fight you you can kick the shit out of them... Don't get a gun, sounds trouble, pick a taser or a pepper spray.
> 
> And dude you get paid this week??


Or just drive when the crazy's are sleep...


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Ehmtbescrewingus said:


> Stick with a .45 ammunition like gas is expensive


Yeah, you'll think twice about shooting them, you'll have to analyze the ROI, is it worth the cost of the bullet to put it through his body ;-)


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

I found a guy here in California, he trains peeps to get there ccw permit. So it is legal to carry concealed in California. The training certificate is $800. Its 4 two hour courses.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

I honest to god would not even want to carry a handgun in my ride. After a 16 hour day driving drunks, loaded on caffeine, sometimes sugar, not much food, getting that disoriented slag coming on, just ****ing shoot me at that point. I could care less. Some nights it's all I can do just to get home between wanting another surge fix, trying to anticipate the potential downsides and rather trying to think clearly and just go home. I know when those dogs are fighting in my head one of them needs a bullet.


----------



## billybengal (Sep 26, 2014)

MiamiFlyer said:


> #1, Yes, "California Legal" is a whole new ballgame when it comes to firearms, but that the same time, it does weed out some of the garbage guns out there. The most important thing about a firearm purchase, is that it is comfortable in your hands, and you can use it well.
> 
> #2 Don't carry unless you are legal to carry. District Attorneys, Politicians, and Judges will make examples out of people with illegal guns, or carrying illegally. You will serve time if you have an incident, or it is found on a traffic stop. California is not a gun friendly state.
> 
> ...


Nice list by Miami Flyer. I'm just gonna add that most "good" people think.shooting someone in an arm or leg is a good thing cause you're trying to stop them but not kill them. Unfortunately, prosecutors don't care about good people, they want to have another won case on their record. You shoot someone in an arm chances are prosecution will throw at you their "explanation" which will be something like you chose to shoot him in the arm so he wasn't a real threat cause if someone is a real threat you don't have a choice but to shoot to kill. Most people shit themselves when they have a gun pointed at them and there's no need to shoot them in their arm. You shoot them in their arm that means they were standing still not attacking you, again, you are screwed. 
Bottom line, you only shoot someone if there is a clear and present danger to you or to your company. You shoot to kill. Never to just "disarm" your attacker.

I'm not a lawyer, this was not a legal advice.

My choice (what I own): Glock 26 (mine is Gen III), with Cor-Bon 9mm 115 grain +P Jacketed Hollowpoint.
Glock never failed me, never jammed with thousands of rounds thru it.
26 is very small.
9mm because anything smaller is too weak IMO. Bigger caliber, ex. .357 have too much penetration, may strike someone after it leaves the bad guy. Also too much recoil.
Many good self defense rounds but for many reasons Cor-Bon 9mm 115 grain +P Jacketed Hollowpoint is the best IMO.

9mm FMJ is one of the cheapest round to shoot when you go to a range.


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

Still a glock fan but moved mostly to Springfield XD .45 series. Agree with the above, 
clear and present danger only, we hopefully are more civilized and cowboy type play is only for the movies...crazy enough that law enforcement is abusing their policing powers..


----------



## Fauxknight (Aug 12, 2014)

12 hours of course time (classroom, lawyer, and range) are required here to get a CCW permit. Cost varies a lot from. $80 to a few hundred. The permit itself is another $65 for 5 years, so overall not too expensive.

Don't look at the ammo cost for your carry gun, unless you are also going to use it a ton at the range. I prefer to,spend most of my range time with .22lr guns to keep costs down. Your carry gun just need enough rounds through it to break it in and keep you competent. Either way your actual self defense rounds are not going to be cheap, but you should only need one box, test a few in the gun and keep the rest for when you need them.

I agree the recoil on the .357 is a bit much, but I've experienced worse with smaller caliber guns, the LC9 was particularly bad.


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

If you are trying to hurt someone and go without being noticed 22 is perfect. Can unload a few rounds throw away and go. I know in cali, even with a permit, you can not legally defend yourself. Get 22 shoot the mother****er a few times throw it away and go on. 357 , 45, you are killing them. Here in Texas sure, but in Cali, **** no unless you like prison. I read about a lady who was being raped, in California, fought the attacker off, got his gun, shot him and is now in jail. In Texas she would never see jail but California laws are crazy


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

In Texas the travel law used to say that you have to be traveling across more than 2 counties with the intent to stay the night, you can carry a gun, now it says if you are traveling you can carry a gun on you. Here in Houston the DA told the police to arrest everyone and let the courts sort it out, but i asked a cop i know and he told me that if you're following the law he should never find your gun and he wasn't looking for them.


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

Except that medical law


----------



## AMBUDRIVER03 (Jul 1, 2014)

I have a Springfield XD40 sub compact, 9 rounds of Federal HydraShok 180gr jacketed hollow points. 

When I used to work private security / executive protection I carried a Springfield Xd40 4" on my hip, and the compact on an ankle holster. 

Never pull your gun unless you're ready to use it, your liability is ONE MILLION DOLLARS PER BULLET, so don't miss... 

I quit doing xpro, because it wasn't worth getting good shot over for $20-30/hr, armed private security pays even less...


----------



## LastGenerationHumanDriver (Oct 18, 2014)

I keep pepper spray and a stun gun in my driver's side door compartment. Ive never had to use either (and I'm sure it would make the news if I did), but I've had enough unruly passengers to want to be prepared. I think that lethal force is generally a totally unnecessary cowboy mentality, but some degree of protection is warranted, for sure.


----------



## AMBUDRIVER03 (Jul 1, 2014)

LastGenerationHumanDriver said:


> I keep pepper spray and a stun gun in my driver's side door compartment. Ive never had to use either (and I'm sure it would make the news if I did), but I've had enough unruly passengers to want to be prepared. I think that lethal force is generally a totally unnecessary cowboy mentality, but some degree of protection is warranted, for sure.


I used to carry the pepper spray when I drove UberX, but I carry a fire extinguisher in the trunk of my suburban now, plus I won't stick around for a drunk unruly passenger.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Fauxknight said:


> Those numbers are a little skewed. More guns owned doesn't always mean more homicides, it just changes the weapon of choice. Weirdly the cities here that make gun ownership more difficult are ones host have high gun homocide rates. After all who goes around shooting people in a neighborhood where every other prison is carrying vs a place where nearly no one is likely to be able to return fire.
> 
> Note that most countries with an overall well balanced and educated high gun ownership have very low gun violence rate. See Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, France, Canada, and others who rank very high in total ownership, but very low in violence. Gun proponents want the US to be like this, but anti-gun political agendas have ramped our gun violence up to what it is today.
> 
> Also you got one of those numbers flat wrong. There are 88 guns per 100 people, not 88% gun ownership. Many people who own guns own more than one, and some people just flat out own a lot of guns.


Sorry about of the typo on the % FauxKnight.

Its an overall different culture here in the land of OZ. Criminals are always going to find ways of owning firearms no mayter how tough laws are.

Looking at YouTube postings of Kids in open carry states just ambling along a public road is nothong short of crazy.

It simply builds the "need" in other folk to have a "equaliser" hanging off their belts.

There needs to be accessibility to guns for hunting and sports use, but carrying around openly is counter productive to keeping the peace - as it promotes fear.


----------



## Fauxknight (Aug 12, 2014)

Nearly very state in the US is open carry, but the practice of doing so isn't nearly as widespread as it used to be. As I pointed out earlier gun violence isn't caused by the prevalence but rather by poor gun education, governmental regulations, news media, and the entertainment industry. There are two ways to get rid of the gun violence: One, take away all the guns...not likely to happen even if we tried. Two, educate people and move to an enlightened pro-gun culture...also not likely to happen. So here we are stuck right in the middle with nothing likely to change anytime soon.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Fauxknight said:


> Nearly very state in the US is open carry, but the practice of doing so isn't nearly as widespread as it used to be. As I pointed out earlier gun violence isn't caused by the prevalence but rather by poor gun education, governmental regulations, news media, and the entertainment industry. There are two ways to get rid of the gun violence: One, take away all the guns...not likely to happen even if we tried. Two, educate people and move to an enlightened pro-gun culture...also not likely to happen. So here we are stuck right in the middle with nothing likely to change anytime soon.


Not a particularly nice status-quo.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> I'm thinking this one..


I carry a S&W Model 60 in .357 Magnum. 5-shot, 2-1/4" revolver. Should be 100% legal in California. Very reliable, packs a huge punch and is very concealable and safe and simple to use. I would also recommend never shooting to wound. Always shoot to kill. This is because self defense generally requires a fear of your life or great personal injury. For this reason, people who fire warning shots go to prison because the prosecutors claim if they had sufficient fear, they would shoot to kill because that is their only option.


----------



## justabass (Nov 15, 2014)

EAA Windicater .38 special snub nose always...


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Not a particularly nice status-quo.


The other side of that is that gun violence has decreased by half in the United States in the past 30 years, even as (or perhaps because of) the number of people legally carrying in public has surged. And gun violence in the United States isn't evenly spread across all demographic and all locations. The great majority of gun violence is tied to urban violence, often related to the trade in illegal narcotics, committed with illegally owned firearms. That violence is going to happen regardless of any controls on legal gun owners. Comparing gun violence in Australia and the United States is misleading because of the different demographics in those countries. States like New Hampshire, Vermont, Iowa, Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota have murder rates on par with Australia even though gun ownership is much higher. In Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota, over half of all adults own guns. What those states don't have is large urban demographics.

Another factor that skews gun violence statistics in the United States is the fact that 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicides. Yet the suicide rate in the United States is comparable to Australia and below that of countries like Austria, Belgium, Finland, France and Sweden. Guns are simply used more frequently for suicides in the United States because they are available and seen as providing a more immediate and less painful death than other methods such as hanging, poisoning, jumping or cutting.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Brady said:


> The other side of that is that gun violence has decreased by half in the United States in the past 30 years, even as (or perhaps because of) the number of people legally carrying in public has surged. And gun violence in the United States isn't evenly spread across all demographic and all locations. The great majority of gun violence is tied to urban violence, often related to the trade in illegal narcotics, committed with illegally owned firearms. That violence is going to happen regardless of any controls on legal gun owners. Comparing gun violence in Australia and the United States is misleading because of the different demographics in those countries. States like New Hampshire, Vermont, Iowa, Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota have murder rates on par with Australia even though gun ownership is much higher. In Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota, over half of all adults own guns. What those states don't have is large urban demographics.
> 
> Another factor that skews gun violence statistics in the United States is the fact that 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicides. Yet the suicide rate in the United States is comparable to Australia and below that of countries like Austria, Belgium, Finland, France and Sweden. Guns are simply used more frequently for suicides in the United States because they are available and seen as providing a more immediate and less painful death than other methods such as hanging, poisoning, jumping or cutting.


Ok, so you have sorted out a real simple way of slashing firearm deaths and injuries by restricting ownership to rural areas only, or folk with membershi to sports shooting clubs. A bit like the system we have here in OZ


----------



## Piotrowski (Sep 9, 2014)

What sucks about being where I am, in the Philly area, is PA is really decent as a CCW covers you when you are in your car, but next door to us we have NJ.  It's almost impossible to work this area and eliminate going into NJ, and I don't know if there is a worst state when it comes to carrying in an auto then that one.


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Ok, so you have sorted out a real simple way of slashing firearm deaths and injuries by restricting ownership to rural areas only, or folk with membershi to sports shooting clubs. A bit like the system we have here in OZ


I think you're missing the point. Legal gun owners in cities also aren't the overwhelming source of violent crime including crimes committed with firearms. Regardless, individual firearm ownership, including the natural right to proportional self defense, is protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. Civil rights protections for self defense are considerably less in Australia than in the United States and rely on common/case law rather than being constitutionally protected. I doubt most Americans would prefer to switch to the Australian model given the differences in our population demographics. I'd prefer to retain the option to keep my pistol and decide whether to carry it while I drive. Your government doesn't allow you that choice.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Brady said:


> I think you're missing the point. Legal gun owners in cities also aren't the overwhelming source of violent crime including crimes committed with firearms. Regardless, individual firearm ownership, including the natural right to proportional self defense, is protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. Civil rights protections for self defense are considerably less in Australia than in the United States and rely on common/case law rather than being constitutionally protected. I doubt most Americans would prefer to switch to the Australian model given the differences in our population demographics. I'd prefer to retain the option to keep my pistol and decide whether to carry it while I drive. Your government doesn't allow you that choice.


Its not that our Government doesn't allow the choice - the majority of Australians voted for the Liberal Party here (right wing similar to Republican Party) who brought in gun buy back laws and tougher ownership laws after the Port Arthur Massacre. 35 dead, 23 wounded in 1996.

That occurred a few years after the Strathfield Massacre in 1991 - a Cabbie went loco at a shopping centre close to my place, a loner who I learnt later had gone to my old school - his AK47 killed 7 and injured many more.

So a couple of terrible incidents galvanised lawmakers into action, They didn't want to follow the US path of easily accessible automatic weapons and the horror they can wreak.

Those who want to own and use guns lawfully go through a very involved process which takes many weeks before the gun is delivered.

The result is approaching what FauxKnight advocates. A better understanding of guns facilitated by by gun clubs that also provide the required secure storage of handguns of members away from urban domestic addresses.

Being able to buy guns over the counter with unlimited ammo would be the first thing to change. It cant happen here unless you hold the highest security clearance.

People simply cant carry a handgun without being a Cop or Accredited Security Personnel. If you get caught with one its a criminal offence and you go to jail.

Its kept a lid on the crazy shootings we hear happening over in the US


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> So a couple of terrible incidents galvanised lawmakers into action, They didn't want to follow the US path of easily accessible automatic weapons and the horror they can wreak.
> 
> The result is approaching what FauxKnight advocates. A better understanding of guns facilitated by by gun clubs that also provide the required secure storage of handguns of members away from urban domestic addresses.


It's actually very difficult to get an automatic weapon in the United States. I'm not aware of any mass shootings that involved automatic weapons outside of a military context.

Secure storage of handguns away from domestic addresses would make them pointless for self defense. That's the premise of this thread.


----------



## Uber Cody (Nov 14, 2014)

Thanks for this information Brady, I am also in Michigan! Just recently got my CPL. I carry a Rueger sr9c love it.


Brady said:


> As my day job, I'm the executive director of the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners, the largest state based gun group in the United States. I carry consistently.
> 
> One premise with what you ask is wrong. If you draw a gun and shoot, you "shoot to stop the threat". You never shoot to wound or shoot to scare. You shoot at the center of exposed mass -usually a triangle formed from the shoulders down to the navel. And you only shoot when justified under the laws of your state which typically mean when you or someone else is in immediate danger of death, serious bodily injury and/or rape. Some states without Stand Your Ground laws also require you to flee if possible. Take a pistol safety training class and get your concealed weapons license. This will be explained to you in the class along with the laws of your state. The arm is a terrible target. It moves rapidly and is hard to hit. It also won't stop someone crazed on drugs even if you do hit it. In 95% of defensive uses of a firearm, the gun is never fired anyway. The simple presence of the gun and the "Stop or I'll shoot!" command is enough to end the threat.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Brady said:


> It's actually very difficult to get an automatic weapon in the United States. I'm not aware of any mass shootings that involved automatic weapons outside of a military context.
> 
> Secure storage of handguns away from domestic addresses would make them pointless for self defense. That's the premise of this thread.


Sorry, I may have gone off topic or perhaps express a contrary view - dont shoot me now! 

Its the accessibility of guns which allows their misuse and the sad deaths that may not have occurred if a gun wasn't in reach of an angered or emotional person.

The overall ownership statistic where in OZ its 15 guns per 100 as opposed to 88 in the USA has a lot to do with folk here in Australia being much less likely to be shot is the crux of the firearm issue.

Please tell me that Vegas, Miami, New York and California dont allow open carry. Places I'd like to visit but not wish to be looking over my shoulder for some unhinged gun owner deciding to go out with a bang.


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> I carry a S&W Model 60 in .357 Magnum. 5-shot, 2-1/4" revolver. Should be 100% legal in California. Very reliable, packs a huge punch and is very concealable and safe and simple to use. I would also recommend never shooting to wound. Always shoot to kill. This is because self defense generally requires a fear of your life or great personal injury. For this reason, people who fire warning shots go to prison because the prosecutors claim if they had sufficient fear, they would shoot to kill because that is their only option.


Good Point, Shoot to Kill. Leave no witnesses, stay out of jail.


----------



## MiamiFlyer (Sep 22, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Sorry, I may have gone off topic or perhaps express a contrary view - dont shoot me now!
> 
> Its the accessibility of guns which allows their misuse and the sad deaths that may not have occurred if a gun wasn't in reach of an angered or emotional person.
> 
> ...


New York does not permit open carry and it is difficult to get a concealed permit, near impossible in NYC which has its own concealed carry rules.
Florida (Miami) does not allow open carry, but it is relatively easy to get a concealed permit.
California is pretty strict on guns, no open carry and concealed permits are limited. There is some recent case law that should allow for more concealed permits to pass through.
Nevada (Vegas) does allow open carry, and concealed permits are relatively easy to obtain. It would still be rare to see someone open carry outside of a shooting range.


----------



## troubleinrivercity (Jul 27, 2014)

Brady said:


> It's actually very difficult to get an automatic weapon in the United States. I'm not aware of any mass shootings that involved automatic weapons outside of a military context.
> 
> Secure storage of handguns away from domestic addresses would make them pointless for self defense. That's the premise of this thread.


Any safe storage of firearms makes them pointless for self-defense. Domestic guns (secured or not) take far, far more innocent lives than they save. Advocates of gun ownership have no response to this and don't care. Just going to have to ramp up use of the term "gun nut" and see if we can't shame the gun proliferators into either toning down the habit or moving to the country. There are a billion guns in this country because the manufacturers decided to make a billion guns and give them to people. The "responsible gun owners"/"law-abiding citizen" thing only stands up if gun access is infinitely scarcer, which the NRA will not allow. It has an ideological need to put a handgun in the hand of every citizen, even black ones.


----------



## MiamiFlyer (Sep 22, 2014)

troubleinrivercity said:


> Any safe storage of firearms makes them pointless for self-defense. Domestic guns (secured or not) take far, far more innocent lives than they save. Advocates of gun ownership have no response to this and don't care. Just going to have to ramp up use of the term "gun nut" and see if we can't shame the gun proliferators into either toning down the habit or moving to the country. There are a billion guns in this country because the manufacturers decided to make a billion guns and give them to people. The "responsible gun owners"/"law-abiding citizen" thing only stands up if gun access is infinitely scarcer, which the NRA will not allow. It has an ideological need to put a handgun in the hand of every citizen, even black ones.


There are no shortage of holsters on the market that allow for a quick release for those trained to use the holster, but would make it more difficult for unknowing people (especially children) to access the firearm if they found it. 



 This guy attempt to take the officers gun after the officer is unable to defend herself. However, he can't get it out of the holster and moves on.
I am an advocate of gun ownership, and I care. I even have a response below....
No manufacturer has given me a gun yet, how do I get on this program? Each one I had to go to a store and purchase. I still have to buy ammo too.
What is with "the black ones" comment??? Black people are allowed to own guns, so are Asians, and Muslims, and Jews, and more.
"Domestic guns (secured or not) take far, far more innocent lives than they save." --- Do you have a citation for this??? or did you just make it up?

I would prefer that gun owners be held responsible for the actions of their gun. That would make sloppy gun owners more responsible.
There's people who have a gun get stolen, and don't even bother to report it.
I also believe you should have to go thru a minimal amount of training before you are permitted to purchase a gun. It's scary enough watching untrained people shop for a gun.
My fellow 'gun nuts' likely will not be with me on this, but if you have to register your car and renew it every year, something similar should be on the table for guns.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Brady said:


> The other side of that is that gun violence has decreased by half in the United States in the past 30 years, even as (or perhaps because of) the number of people legally carrying in public has surged. And gun violence in the United States isn't evenly spread across all demographic and all locations. The great majority of gun violence is tied to urban violence, often related to the trade in illegal narcotics, committed with illegally owned firearms. That violence is going to happen regardless of any controls on legal gun owners. Comparing gun violence in Australia and the United States is misleading because of the different demographics in those countries. States like New Hampshire, Vermont, Iowa, Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota have murder rates on par with Australia even though gun ownership is much higher. In Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota, over half of all adults own guns. What those states don't have is large urban demographics.
> 
> Another factor that skews gun violence statistics in the United States is the fact that 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicides. Yet the suicide rate in the United States is comparable to Australia and below that of countries like Austria, Belgium, Finland, France and Sweden. Guns are simply used more frequently for suicides in the United States because they are available and seen as providing a more immediate and less painful death than other methods such as hanging, poisoning, jumping or cutting.


Interesting screenname for someone who is obviously pro-gun, lol.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Ok, so you have sorted out a real simple way of slashing firearm deaths and injuries by restricting ownership to rural areas only, or folk with membershi to sports shooting clubs. A bit like the system we have here in OZ


That doesn't work. Cities like Chicago and Washington DC had outright gun bans for over 30 years, and were constantly at the top of the list of cities with the highest murder rates. Once the DC vs. Heller Supreme court verdict was decided and citizens were allowed to legally own guns, crime started to decrease. Lesson: The best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

This discussion has gone from gun aficionado(preferences) to anarchy , it should probably end


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Ehmtbescrewingus said:


> This discussion has gone from gun aficionado(preferences) to anarchy , it should probably end


IOW, you are a statist who wants government control of guns even though the research on the subject proves it is a bad idea. Would you like to re-enact prohibition as well?


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> IOW, you are a statist who wants government control of guns even though the research on the subject proves it is a bad idea. Would you like to re-enact prohibition as well?


First off, if I were a statist I wouldn't own a gun, served in the military or openly support this forum. So get your facts straight before you throw labels, it makes you look small when you make uninformed comments. While I generally believe that everyone has an opinion, it doesn't even afford you a small opportunity to impose your thoughts on me from a single post. Nothing in my post indicated that I supported any form of regulatory actions.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

MiamiFlyer said:


> There are no shortage of holsters on the market that allow for a quick release for those trained to use the holster, but would make it more difficult for unknowing people (especially children) to access the firearm if they found it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd be happier if new technology would be used to restrict a gun's use to its registered owner.

Wouldn't help suicides though.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Brady said:


> It's actually very difficult to get an automatic weapon in the United States. I'm not aware of any mass shootings that involved automatic weapons outside of a military context.
> 
> Secure storage of handguns away from domestic addresses would make them pointless for self defense. That's the premise of this thread.


Semi-Automatic Weapons then


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> That doesn't work. Cities like Chicago and Washington DC had outright gun bans for over 30 years, and were constantly at the top of the list of cities with the highest murder rates. Once the DC vs. Heller Supreme court verdict was decided and citizens were allowed to legally own guns, crime started to decrease. Lesson: The best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.


Heres an example of slack gun handling.

That Chimp picks it up pretty quick! Then does a victory dance - did he figure out his sudden elevation in influence by clearing the area of humans? I bet a few seconds after the video stopped his little head got blown off his shoulders. About the only outcome I'd think. I dont think any of those guys would be up to negotiating with a Chimp armed with an AK47 (that actually is a funny vision)


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Ehmtbescrewingus said:


> First off, if I were a statist I wouldn't own a gun, served in the military or openly support this forum. So get your facts straight before you throw labels, it makes you look small when you make uninformed comments. While I generally believe that everyone has an opinion, it doesn't even afford you a small opportunity to impose your thoughts on me from a single post. Nothing in my post indicated that I supported any form of regulatory actions.


You referred to the discussion as anarchy when the discussion was about legal handling of firearms in the US. This legal discussion included permitting processes, handgun choice, and laws governing self defense. As to your most recent comment; you believe that statists don't serve in the military or participate in online forums?????? I imposed nothing on you. Please explain how I "impose thoughts" on someone without enacting some sort of legislation or turning those thoughts into some kind of forceful action. Thoughts and opinions exists whether you know about them or not. You came into a discussion and proclaimed it as anarchy and that it should end, kind of makes it look like you are the one trying to impose your thoughts on others, and that just proves that you are small. I stand by my orignial opinion of you: statist.


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> You referred to the discussion as anarchy when the discussion was about legal handling of firearms in the US. This legal discussion included permitting processes, handgun choice, and laws governing self defense. As to your most recent comment; you believe that statists don't serve in the military or participate in online forums?????? I imposed nothing on you. Please explain how I "impose thoughts" on someone without enacting some sort of legislation or turning those thoughts into some kind of forceful action. Thoughts and opinions exists whether you know about them or not. You came into a discussion and proclaimed it as anarchy and that it should end, kind of makes it look like you are the one trying to impose your thoughts on others, and that just proves that you are small. I stand by my orignial opinion of you: statist.


I was early entrant into this discussion. And I don't play the argument game it's stupid. And I stand by my opinion that you're small in thought. Don't bother replying I don't give a shit either way.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Semi-Automatic Weapons then


Why do you gun ban types keep wanting to go down the list? Next it will be pump action, then anything with a magazine, then everything altogether. Let me ask you a question: England has a complete gun ban, did it stop crime? murders? even gun violence? No, it gave organized crime more power. It gave the government more power. Part of Hitler's way of crushing opposition was banning guns. He started with registration, then went to an outright ban and confiscation. Then his regime killed over 6 million people. Stalin did worse. Mao worse still. All said that common people should not own guns, they should be in the hands of the state only. Weapons are only tools. Criminals like a disarmed public, so do dictators. This contains a lot of pertinant statistics, including on England, where a total gun ban is in effect, and the murder rate has steadily risen since the 1968 enactment of their original gun control law. It won't let me post the link because of new user restrictions. But go to "just facts" dotcm slash gun control dot asp pound crime.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Ehmtbescrewingus said:


> I was early entrant into this discussion. And I don't play the argument game it's stupid. And I stand by my opinion that you're small in thought. Don't bother replying I don't give a shit either way.


IOW, I'm right. You can't face facts, so, like a woman, you "disengage".


----------



## Ehmtbescrewingus (Oct 16, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> IOW, I'm right. You can't face facts, so, like a woman, you "disengage".


You better check that mouth Hayseed, it's easy to talk shit online. I disengage because you rant its boring. Want a fight, go look in the mirror..


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> You referred to the discussion as anarchy when the discussion was about legal handling of firearms in the US. This legal discussion included permitting processes, handgun choice, and laws governing self defense. As to your most recent comment; you believe that statists don't serve in the military or participate in online forums?????? I imposed nothing on you. Please explain how I "impose thoughts" on someone without enacting some sort of legislation or turning those thoughts into some kind of forceful action. Thoughts and opinions exists whether you know about them or not. You came into a discussion and proclaimed it as anarchy and that it should end, kind of makes it look like you are the one trying to impose your thoughts on others, and that just proves that you are small. I stand by my orignial opinion of you: statist.


Wow! This thread has gone deep and meaningful! I had to look up what Statist meant - Geez, I did not think I had this new identity! I believe there are some situations where I would trust a Government agency with their stated public service charter ahead of secretive privately owned companies run by megalomaniacs.

If government policy protects both consumers and the workforce in an everyday transaction - then I must be a Statist.

A transport transaction that increasingly becoming controlled by a company that has a history of putting its workers at risk of citations and legal action for the benefit of their goals - then I guess I'm a Statist


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> Why do you gun ban types keep wanting to go down the list? Next it will be pump action, then anything with a magazine, then everything altogether. Let me ask you a question: England has a complete gun ban, did it stop crime? murders? even gun violence? No, it gave organized crime more power. It gave the government more power. Part of Hitler's way of crushing opposition was banning guns. He started with registration, then went to an outright ban and confiscation. Then his regime killed over 6 million people. Stalin did worse. Mao worse still. All said that common people should not own guns, they should be in the hands of the state only. Weapons are only tools. Criminals like a disarmed public, so do dictators. This contains a lot of pertinant statistics, including on England, where a total gun ban is in effect, and the murder rate has steadily risen since the 1968 enactment of their original gun control law. It won't let me post the link because of new user restrictions. But go to "just facts" dotcm slash gun control dot asp pound crime.


Whilst we wait for some dictator led mass murder, we allow many many people who shouldn't be allowed near deadly weapons to stock up on firepower. No controls, no education.

I like guns, I have a good friend on the Aussie shooting team and I enjoy being pasted on the range by her. But she teaches me something about shooting discipline everytime.

That's what is lacking. The NRA would be such a great organisation if it developed a competency based program of controlled gun ownership.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Whilst we wait for some dictator led mass murder, we allow many many people who shouldn't be allowed near deadly weapons to stock up on firepower. No controls, no education.
> 
> I like guns, I have a good friend on the Aussie shooting team and I enjoy being pasted on the range by her. But she teaches me something about shooting discipline everytime.
> 
> That's what is lacking. The NRA would be such a great organisation if it developed a competency based program of controlled gun ownership.


The NRA has some. Most notably youth education classes. What do you hope to accomplish by taking guns away from people? Murder rates go up when governments ban guns, proven fact. So do assaults, robberies and home invasions. So, violence intensifies, it doesn't go away. The paradox of the gun banner's position is that if crime goes down after gun bans, they believe that the ban worked and that there is no need to allow guns. If crime goes up (which it does every time), they say they just need more stringent restrictions and more government power. Facts be damned, it's all about an agenda. I will say that culture also plays a big role in politics, my culture came about through an armed revolution against a tyrannical king. Your nation came about as a prison colony, so I can see why people in your culture are more submissive to government control.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Ehmtbescrewingus said:


> You better check that mouth Hayseed, it's easy to talk shit online. I disengage because you rant its boring. Want a fight, go look in the mirror..


Yet you keep commenting.....it seems that I control you.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> The NRA has some. Most notably youth education classes. What do you hope to accomplish by taking guns away from people? Murder rates go up when governments ban guns, proven fact. So do assaults, robberies and home invasions. So, violence intensifies, it doesn't go away. The paradox of the gun banner's position is that if crime goes down after gun bans, they believe that the ban worked and that there is no need to allow guns. If crime goes up (which it does every time), they say they just need more stringent restrictions and more government power. Facts be damned, it's all about an agenda. I will say that culture also plays a big role in politics, my culture came about through an armed revolution against a tyrannical king. Your nation came about as a prison colony, so I can see why people in your culture are more submissive to government control.


You have chosen to distort what I advocate. I do not want to " take guns from people". There needs an acceptance by gun owners that because of the huge cost to society and families when a gun owner goes crazy - more stringent controls are in order.

Folk can own guns here, but at any time without warning they know they can be visited by Police to audit the manner the firearms and ammo are stored.

Kids pick up bows and arrows, rocks and knives, use them irresponsibly and hurt each other. I would hope that you would like to reduce the chances of kuds and adults picking up a gun and using it irresponsibly.

My cultural background is a small island in the Mediterranean. It could never protect itself against determined seaborne invaders. Be they Persians, Greeks, Romans French the island elders would meet them at the harbour entrance and welcome them to their new role of Island administrator.

That was Until WW11 when it was the most heavily bombed piece of land in the whole of Europe.

It was also the only European country not to have fallen to the Germans and Italians. The island nation still stands as the only Country And All its people ever to be given the George Cross Bravery award. A good mix of fight and pragmatism in my background.


----------



## Goober (Oct 16, 2014)

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...gation/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

@Optimus Uber your thread gets a special mention:

http://m.fastcompany.com/3038668/it...-already-dreading-the-new-spotify-partnership


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Whilst we wait for some dictator led mass murder, we allow many many people who shouldn't be allowed near deadly weapons to stock up on firepower. No controls, no education.
> 
> I like guns, I have a good friend on the Aussie shooting team and I enjoy being pasted on the range by her. But she teaches me something about shooting discipline everytime.
> 
> That's what is lacking. The NRA would be such a great organisation if it developed a competency based program of controlled gun ownership.


Sydney, I think your perception of gun ownership in the United States, the NRA and semi-automatic weapons is tainted by what you've seen in the media. It's not reality.

The NRA is a gun safety education organization first and foremost. Their political activities to protect legal gun ownership is a secondary mission. It's gets far more attention because of politics. In order to get a concealed pistol license where I live in Michigan, a person must first have taken an NRA personal protection course in addition to pistol safety education. This is a minimum 8 hour course that often exceeds 16 hours. Gun owners here complain about the time and cost involved but Michigan's requirement is minor compared to what people are required to have in states like Illinois and California. A legal gun owner in the United States usually has far more gun safety education than the average Australian or even the average American.

These people aren't causing firearms violence. Take away suicides that account for 2/3 of firearms deaths, most firearms violence comes from the thug culture in American's inner cities using stolen firearms. Easy access to guns is NOT the cause of that violence. It's roots are much deeper and go back to the legacy of slavery in the United States and the northern migration of African-Americans from the rural South to American's urban industrial areas in the early 1990's and the effect that had on family structure and poverty.

As for semi-automatic weapons, people who don't understand guns see the word "automatic" and equate semi-automatic with true automatic firearms like you did. Semi-automatic simply means that a round is fired with each pull of the trigger. Most common sporting rifles, many shotguns and most target pistols are semi-automatic. There's nothing particularly more deadly about semi-automatic firearms. The non-semiautomatic .38/.357 revolver I carry isn't any less deadly than a similar calibre 9mm semi-automatic pistol.


----------



## Goober (Oct 16, 2014)

thought it'd say it in the link...this an a cab driver stabbed in the neck with a knife recorded with a backseat cam


Goober said:


> http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...gation/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> @Optimus Uber your thread gets a special mention:
> 
> http://m.fastcompany.com/3038668/it...-already-dreading-the-new-spotify-partnership


Thanks for the heads up. Second time one of my posts have been referenced in another publication. Wonder why no one has referenced the UberPUFF idea, haha!!

Where's my cut in the revenue from the story? Even Uberpeople.net deserves a cut. If you look at the story, it's just a bunch of references. Not much meat there than just comments about everyone else's words. Author tried to make it dramatic with the gun recommendation title to build steam.

Fact is, anyone doing this job that isn't carrying something for protection is ignorant.

I carry a stun gun and a knife. The knife I carry will easily penetrate from the front to back. With a little twist, you're not making it out alive. Let that be a warning for anyone that wants to get out of line.
I had some jack ass juvenile hop in my car one night when I had two clients in the back seat. As far as I am concerned, that's breaking and entering with intent to do harm. I pulled the stun gun, discharged it and told him the next one is going through his body, get out now. He looked like a deer in the headlights, like he couldn't believe what was happening. He jumped out of the car, then as I was leaving decided to confront me again, asking me if I was serious. I told him, lets call the police and discuss it with them. Let's see if they consider what you did utterly moronic. His friends pulled him away. Yeah, just great dealing with the lucid alcoholic. The fact of the matter is, they weren't even my client. Jumping into a car that doesn't belong to you, I consider aggressive behavior, especially when your intent is not clear. Stupid kids. If I would've shot him, then what? I would be the new zimmerman because I didn't act accordingly. Sorry, but if it looks like a goose and quacks like a goose, then I say let's eat foie gras.


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Goober said:


> thought it'd say it in the link...this an a cab driver stabbed in the neck with a knife recorded with a backseat cam


This is the exact reason we carry. The fact, the referencing article portrayed this thread in a way to make it look like we are some type of criminals, I find as faux news. It's no different than what we see on our regular news station. I've got a story, but lets make it better and make Uber drivers look crazy. Lets add fictious facts, make them look like bad. If we don't behave in their car they'll shoot us. The fact is the guns are there not just to protect the driver, but also our passengers. We pack, because it is our job to get the clients to their destination safely. The above example is just one of many why I carry what I carry and soon while I will be a carrying a gun next. Regardless of the dysfunctional laws of California. The only ones who can get guns here now are the criminals.

After what I experienced with the Santa Monica Police Department, I now realize, I'm on my own, they only come to mop up the mess once it is over. In that case, just call the fire department and the coroner, as there is no need for the police department. As all that is going to be left when I am done is a corpse and a pool of blood.

The Santa Monica Police Department should relocate their office to 3rd St Promenade outside the Famima. That's where you can find up to 6 of them at a time.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Brady said:


> Sydner, I think your perception of gun ownership in the United States, the NRA and semi-automatic weapons is tainted by what you've seen in the media. It's not reality.
> 
> The NRA is a gun safety education organization first and foremost. Their political activities to protect legal gun ownership is a secondary mission. It's gets far more attention because of politics. In order to get a concealed pistol license where I live in Michigan, a person must first have taken an NRA personal protection course in addition to pistol safety education. This is a minimum 8 hour course that often exceeds 16 hours. Gun owners here complain about the time and cost involved but Michigan's requirement is minor compared to what people are required to have in state's like Illinois and California. A legal gun owner in the United States usually has far more gun safety education than the average Australian or even the average American.
> 
> ...


Ok Brady, I appreciate the insight and your clear justifiable reasons to be allowed to carry weapons. But the system isnt perfect when you look at the higher gun crime rates in the US compared to other countries.

What would you change to allow current gun freedoms and lower gun crimes?


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Ok Brady, I appreciate the insight and your clear justifiable reasons to be allowed to carry weapons. But the system isnt perfect when you look at the higher gun crime rates in the US compared to other countries.
> 
> What would you change to allow current gun freedoms and lower gun crimes?


As I mentioned earlier, gun violence in the United States has dropped by half over the past 30 years. There are multiple causes to this, the main one being higher incarceration rates. That's obviously not a great solution and the United States has one of the largest percentages of people behind bars in the world. Over 50% of the shootings in the United States are black men shooting other black men despite black Americans only representing 13.2% of the total U.S. population. There's no easy answer to solving the causes of this. The government's Great Society efforts beginning in the 1960s including welfare programs and affirmative action haven't improved the plight of blacks in the United States. That population continues to face far more discrimination than any other racial group in the country. Many young black men in our cities turn to crime because they have few other economic opportunities than military service and even the military has become increasingly selective of who it will take. Republicans ignore the issue because few blacks vote for that party. Democrats ignore it because of racial sensitivity and because focusing on urban policy costs them votes with suburban and rural voters. The media also tends to ignore black on black violence focusing instead on mass shootings, particularly school shootings, even though they account for fewer than 2% of all firearms fatalities. This isn't a gun problem. Inner city violence would exist even if guns weren't available -an impossible scenario anyway in the U.S. Gun control efforts have been counterproductive, counter-intuitively leading to an increase in gun violence in places where controls have been enacted. It doesn't help that hip hop music and other cultural influences on young black men continue to celebrate materialism, sex outside of family relationships and thug violence. Black kids growing up in our major cities face a much steeper hill to climb to economic success through legal means than whites, Asians and Latinos. This is a complex social problem without any clear long term solutions. Some things like marijuana decriminalization may help, but they're each only going to make a very small impact.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Brady said:


> As I mentioned earlier, gun violence in the United States has dropped by half over the past 30 years. There are multiple causes to this, the main one being higher incarceration rates. That's obviously not a great solution and the United States has one of the largest percentages of people behind bars in the world. Over 50% of the shootings in the United States are black men shooting other black men despite black Americans only representing 13.2% of the total U.S. population. There's no easy answer to solving the causes of this. The government's Great Society efforts beginning in the 1960s including welfare programs and affirmative action haven't improved the plight of blacks in the United States. That population continues to face far more discrimination than any other racial group in the country. Many young black men in our cities turn to crime because they have few other economic opportunities than military service and even the military has become increasingly selective of who it will take. Republicans ignore the issue because few blacks vote for that party. Democrats ignore it because of racial sensitivity and because focusing on urban policy costs them votes with suburban and rural voters. The media also tends to ignore black on black violence focusing instead on mass shootings, particularly school shootings, even though they account for fewer than 2% of all firearms fatalities. This isn't a gun problem. Inner city violence would exist even if guns weren't available -an impossible scenario anyway in the U.S. Gun control efforts have been counterproductive, counter-intuitively leading to an increase in gun violence in places where controls have been enacted. It doesn't help that hip hop music and other cultural influences on young black men continue to celebrate materialism, sex outside of family relationships and thug violence. Black kids growing up in our major cities face a much steeper hill to climb to economic success through legal means than whites, Asians and Latinos. This is a complex social problem without any clear long term solutions. Some things like marijuana decriminalization may help, but they're each only going to make a very small impact.


So you believe that no change in the way guns are designed, distributed, registered can further lower firearm deaths? No change to Ammo accessibility or firearm security and storage?

Its mainly to do with disaffected minority groups picking up a gun rather than a knife to vent their frustrations?

You've never met a fellow gun owner and thought to yourself "he/ she shouldn't be in charge of a deadly weapon".


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> So you believe that no change in the way guns are designed, distributed, registered can further lower firearm deaths? No change to Ammo accessibility or firearm security and storage?
> 
> Its mainly to do with disaffected minority groups picking up a gun rather than a knife to vent their frustrations?
> 
> You've never met a fellow gun owner and thought to yourself "he/ she shouldn't be in charge of a deadly weapon".


As for your first two questions, my answer is no. People can and do get guns and ammo even where laws prevent them from doing so. Most do it out of perceived necessity. The United States went through a period of heavy gun control regulations from 1964-2001. It didn't decrease firearms violence. In fact, it seemed to make it worse, especially in the cities with the most stringent laws.

For your third question, the answer is that it isn't possible in the United States. Unlike Australia which began as a penal colony and became its own country peacefully, the U.S. was created by free men with guns, grew through guns and has become the most powerful country in the world through guns. Guns form the foundation of this country and the armed nature of the United States continues to benefit other free people around the world. While I certainly don't want to minimize Australia's outstanding contribution in both world wars, American guns are a large part of the reason the Empire of Japan never invaded Australia.










For your fourth question, yes, there are people I've met who can legally own a gun but shouldn't have one. But there are plenty of people who shouldn't own a car, become parents or drink alcohol but are allowed to do all those things. And unlike cars and alcohol, proportional self defense is a basic human right.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> You have chosen to distort what I advocate. I do not want to " take guns from people". There needs an acceptance by gun owners that because of the huge cost to society and families when a gun owner goes crazy - more stringent controls are in order.
> 
> Folk can own guns here, but at any time without warning they know they can be visited by Police to audit the manner the firearms and ammo are stored.
> 
> ...


Random police inspections of houses? No thanks, huge encroachment of freedom. That would also imply that police have seizure powers when they see something they don't like, so that means legalized confiscation. Therefore, I have not distorted your position, you just don't know what your position implies. Here in the states, the 4th Amendment protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. If the cops want to come in without probable cause, they need a warrant. Also, we have laws stating that parents are responsible for their children's actions, so its not like crime goes unpunished. Show me a country without any crime, you can't. And interesting corrolary to your story about Malta: the population has a history of bending over to anyone who would rule them. When they stood up against the power, they succeeded. Given that history, you should be pretty against government intrusion.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> Random police inspections of houses? No thanks, huge encroachment of freedom. That would also imply that police have seizure powers when they see something they don't like, so that means legalized confiscation. Therefore, I have not distorted your position, you just don't know what your position implies. Here in the states, the 4th Amendment protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. If the cops want to come in without probable cause, they need a warrant. Also, we have laws stating that parents are responsible for their children's actions, so its not like crime goes unpunished. Show me a country without any crime, you can't. And interesting corrolary to your story about Malta: the population has a history of bending over to anyone who would rule them. When they stood up against the power, they succeeded. Given that history, you should be pretty against government intrusion.


Hi Rideshare Guru, I'm starting to get a feel for the reasoning.

The average gun owner sees Government agencies as the real or potential enemy. Police with powers to Audit the safe storage of firearms present a real threat.

Here in OZ you may think I'm living in a fantasy (shared with the majority of voters here) but living with fewer guns around, and knowing Police have the audit rights allows us to sleep easier.

National Firearms Program Implementation Act 1996

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/BD9798/98bd224

It cost the country 500million dollars but bought back close to 700,000 guns


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Hi Rideshare Guru, I'm starting to get a feel for the reasoning.
> 
> The average gun owner sees Government agencies as the real or potential enemy. Police with powers to Audit the safe storage of firearms present a real threat.
> 
> ...


If the government here tried to impose such a system, there would be another revolution. Australia is a different society than America, with few really big cities, and a low overall population density and not a very big mix of ethnicities. I found an article about crime and crime rates before and after your gun law went into effect. Gun homicides fell almost in half, but that points out a fact: if you ban guns, only criminals will have them. Knife homicides rose by 33% however, which raises another fact: if someone really wants to kill you, they will try to find a way. Another interesting fact is that over 2/3 of the homicides were drug or alcohol related. If the same reasoning that was applied to guns actually works, why not ban drugs and alcohol? Have random, police inspections looking for beer, beer making equipment or drug paraphernalia? At what point do you draw the line of government intrusion? Another interesting sidenote, the best studies on the subject indicate that while there was a decrease in overall homicides, it was not statistically significant. Britain also imposed a knife ban, so to buy certain knives, you have to be a licensed chef, do you support that too? http://www.smh.com.au/national/murders-at-a-low-but-knife-use-on-the-rise-20130220-2eroj.html


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> If the government here tried to impose such a system, there would be another revolution. Australia is a different society than America, with few really big cities, and a low overall population density and not a very big mix of ethnicities. I found an article about crime and crime rates before and after your gun law went into effect. Gun homicides fell almost in half, but that points out a fact: if you ban guns, only criminals will have them. Knife homicides rose by 33% however, which raises another fact: if someone really wants to kill you, they will try to find a way. Another interesting fact is that over 2/3 of the homicides were drug or alcohol related. If the same reasoning that was applied to guns actually works, why not ban drugs and alcohol? Have random, police inspections looking for beer, beer making equipment or drug paraphernalia? At what point do you draw the line of government intrusion? Another interesting sidenote, the best studies on the subject indicate that while there was a decrease in overall homicides, it was not statistically significant. Britain also imposed a knife ban, so to buy certain knives, you have to be a licensed chef, do you support that too? http://www.smh.com.au/national/murders-at-a-low-but-knife-use-on-the-rise-20130220-2eroj.html


There are Knife restrictions in place here too. No Flick knives are allowed. And some other type also. A lot of people got hurt and not killed with guns. Not always during a crime - just lax storage and bad gun discipline. Those accidental shoots have decreased.
Its hard to avoid Criminal Intent - you are right. But guns make it very simple for Criminals to carry out crime.

I guess the big difference between the 2 countries is that I and the vast majority of Australians can live life not thinking that I need to carry a gun, because one day I'll have to Kill someone to defend myself. Clearly its differant in the US.

The rationale about Cities and ethnic mix doesn't wash, as Australia does have very diverse populations and there are more guns owned in rural areas which doesn't equate to more criminal gun deaths.

Like I said at the start - I feel safer here with fewer guns about


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> There are Knife restrictions in place here too. No Flick knives are allowed. And some other type also. A lot of people got hurt and not killed with guns. Not always during a crime - just lax storage and bad gun discipline. Those accidental shoots have decreased.
> Its hard to avoid Criminal Intent - you are right. But guns make it very simple for Criminals to carry out crime.
> 
> I guess the big difference between the 2 countries is that I and the vast majority of Australians can live life not thinking that I need to carry a gun, because one day I'll have to Kill someone to defend myself. Clearly its differant in the US.
> ...


I happen to own 34 firearms of varying types, from single shot handguns to semi-automatic rifles with 30-round magazines. I do carry concealed, especially in the line of work that I do as a driver. I have never had a gun related accident in my 15 years as a gun owner. I also do not need as many firearms as I have for personal defense (obviously), nor am I a hunter. I distrust government inherently, I believe that I should fear the government that fears my guns. There is good reason for government mistrust here, as my government has started wars based entirely on lies, including the Vietnam War (Gulf of Tonkin incident), the 2nd Iraq war (WMD fraud), the bombing of Pearl Harbor in WWII was an expected event and FDR provoked the Japanese and left the fleet vulnerable, the sinking of the Lucitania by Germany during WWI was an event that they warned us about beforehand, yet it was sent into harms way and then used as justification for entering that war, and some are saying even 9/11 was orchestrated by my government (not proven, but I wouldn't put it past them with their history). During prohibition, the government here added deadly chemicals to alcohol so as to kill anyone who tried to drink it. Meanwhile, our police are being militarized, even the IRS (the tax man) has SWAT teams with fully automatic weapons. In short, IMHO, an armed citizenry is the only thing stopping the US from being a complete police state. Oh, and about the ethnic mix in Australia, 92% of your population is white, huge difference from here in the states. http://www.statista.com/statistics/260502/ethnic-groups-in-australia/


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Brady said:


> As I mentioned earlier, gun violence in the United States has dropped by half over the past 30 years. There are multiple causes to this, the main one being higher incarceration rates. That's obviously not a great solution and the United States has one of the largest percentages of people behind bars in the world. Over 50% of the shootings in the United States are black men shooting other black men despite black Americans only representing 13.2% of the total U.S. population. There's no easy answer to solving the causes of this. The government's Great Society efforts beginning in the 1960s including welfare programs and affirmative action haven't improved the plight of blacks in the United States. That population continues to face far more discrimination than any other racial group in the country. Many young black men in our cities turn to crime because they have few other economic opportunities than military service and even the military has become increasingly selective of who it will take. Republicans ignore the issue because few blacks vote for that party. Democrats ignore it because of racial sensitivity and because focusing on urban policy costs them votes with suburban and rural voters. The media also tends to ignore black on black violence focusing instead on mass shootings, particularly school shootings, even though they account for fewer than 2% of all firearms fatalities. This isn't a gun problem. Inner city violence would exist even if guns weren't available -an impossible scenario anyway in the U.S. Gun control efforts have been counterproductive, counter-intuitively leading to an increase in gun violence in places where controls have been enacted. It doesn't help that hip hop music and other cultural influences on young black men continue to celebrate materialism, sex outside of family relationships and thug violence. Black kids growing up in our major cities face a much steeper hill to climb to economic success through legal means than whites, Asians and Latinos. This is a complex social problem without any clear long term solutions. Some things like marijuana decriminalization may help, but they're each only going to make a very small impact.


I want to precede this by saying that I am both very pro-gun and very pro-life. However, if you watch a movie called "Freakonomics", they argue that the #1 determining factor in the decline in crime has been legalization of abortion in the US. They argue that crime rates started declining significantly about 18 years after Roe vs. Wade and state that the cause of this is that fewer unwanted children are born and therefore, the ones born are more likely to be wanted and have a better overall upbringing. I believe that most of the poverty problem is government created due to the perpetual welfare state created under LBJ's "great society" programs. That is where the "black problems" that you mention start. A more valid statistic would be that crime has gone down after the Clinton era assault weapons ban was allowed to expire. This is because that event was more than 18 years after Roe vs. Wade, and banned the specific types of firearms that gun grabbers blame the most: semi-automatic, "scary looking" rifles.


----------



## Narkos (Aug 5, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Semi-Automatic Weapons then


 A semi-automatic can very easily, cheaply and legally be turned into a fully automatic weapon in some U.S. states. Look up "bump stock" on Google.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Narkos said:


> A semi-automatic can very easily, cheaply and legally be turned into a fully automatic weapon in some U.S. states. Look up "bump stock" on Google.


The use of a bump stock does not modify the firing mechanism, each bullet still takes an individual trigger pull, therefore, though the rate of fire is significantly increased, it is not a fully automatic weapon, nor is the rate of fire the same as a properly modified fully automatic weapon. BTW, if the average citizen can't have a fully automatic weapon, then I see no reason why governmental agencies such as the IRS, Bureau of Wildlife Management, or even your local cops need to have them.


----------



## Lidman (Nov 13, 2014)

Or just bring a knife that's most likely going to be bigger then the perps, so if you get accosted by him with his knife, you pull out yours out and tell him now this IS a KNife.


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> I want to precede this by saying that I am both very pro-gun and very pro-life. However, if you watch a movie called "Freakonomics", they argue that the #1 determining factor in the decline in crime has been legalization of abortion in the US. They argue that crime rates started declining significantly about 18 years after Roe vs. Wade and state that the cause of this is that fewer unwanted children are born and therefore, the ones born are more likely to be wanted and have a better overall upbringing. I believe that most of the poverty problem is government created due to the perpetual welfare state created under LBJ's "great society" programs. That is where the "black problems" that you mention start. A more valid statistic would be that crime has gone down after the Clinton era assault weapons ban was allowed to expire. This is because that event was more than 18 years after Roe vs. Wade, and banned the specific types of firearms that gun grabbers blame the most: semi-automatic, "scary looking" rifles.


I've seen this theory before. It's been debunked by a number of researchers. There is contrary evidence in fact that legal abortion causes crime to increase: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/07/07/myth-about-abortion-and-crime/

Abortion may have a minor effect on crime rates, but the major factor has been a surge in incarceration rates.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Lidman said:


> Or just bring a knife that's most likely going to be bigger then the perps, so if you get accosted by him with his knife, you pull out yours out and tell him now this IS a KNife.


I think I remember some Aussie saying that once!


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

Brady said:


> I've seen this theory before. It's been debunked by a number of researchers. There is contrary evidence in fact that legal abortion causes crime to increase: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/07/07/myth-about-abortion-and-crime/
> 
> Abortion may have a minor effect on crime rates, but the major factor has been a surge in incarceration rates.


Interesting read. Personally, I oppose abortion on moral grounds, it's quite flawed to argue for the ability to kill a human being on the grounds that they may or may not grow up to do harm to others. That's Minority Report in real life.


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

Really going to quote fox news. What a joke. Freakonomics ia a very good movie. Pro gun and anti choice is an oxymoron. Can't promote killing while pretending to save lives.


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> Interesting read. Personally, I oppose abortion on moral grounds, it's quite flawed to argue for the ability to kill a human being on the grounds that they may or may not grow up to do harm to others. That's Minority Report in real life.


If you watched the movie you would know thats not what its about. the less unwanted children , the less crime.


----------



## sts713 (Oct 4, 2014)

Would rather an unformed embryo die than brother, father, friend. War is much worse than abortion


----------



## DjTim (Oct 18, 2014)

Wow - Okay, this thread went way off the rails in the last few posts.

Let me throw something out here, and this is from an ex-police officer's point of view. My father in law and his brother are both ex-police. We were talking about driving and safety. I had mentioned this post and talked about the best defence in a car if something goes wrong. My FIL is a certified trainer. He said it's always good to carry, but if and when it comes down to it, you most likely would not be able to pull your weapon fast enough while inside the car if there is another weapon pointed at you. Sprays are no good in confined spaces. The big thing is getting distance between you and the person that is the threat. Depending on where you are at, if there isn't a justification on bringing a gun out, you could be charged with brandishing a weapon, even if you have the correct permits to carry.

So in saying that, he liked the Glock 17 and the Beretta M9 primarily because he trained people on the force with both guns. He also liked the S&W 380 Bodyguard for a backup. I personally like shooting the H&K USP, P30 and the HK45 (compact).


----------



## timmyolo (Sep 5, 2014)

I am reporting you all for starting and posting a political thread...

That said, .380 would be a good choice.
Also, the NRA is there to teach and help with firearm safety. Eddie Eagle is a gun safety program it offers for children yet is ignored by most schools due to the average teacher having liberal, anti gun leanings.
Also aslo, check out http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx
For stories of US citizens defending themselves with firearms 
Also also also most people do not realize that the Republican Party in the US was started by abolishonists with the intent to end slavery, unlike the democrats, who were mostly secessionists


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

sts713 said:


> Really going to quote fox news. What a joke. Freakonomics ia a very good movie. Pro gun and anti choice is an oxymoron. Can't promote killing while pretending to save lives.


Ok, let me explain how first of all what you say is completely backwards, and 2nd of all how being "pro-choice" makes someone an advocate for legalized murder. Completely free of any religion, btw. First of all, a firearm is a tool, just as a knife, a shovel, a baseball bat and a tire iron. All of those things can and have been used to kill people. They all also have other purposes, such as hunting, cooking, digging, and changing a flat tire, yet only the firearm is constitutionally protected; why do you think that is? It is because a firearm is the easiest inanimate object for small minded people to lay blame for societies ills on, this inanimate object does the bidding of the person who controls it, just as any other. A firearm requires less effort to kill someone with it than does a bat, knife, or tire iron, but it is only a tool nonetheless. A firearm has many useful, legal purposes such as personal defense, hunting, and sport shooting. Personal firearm use was also a necessity for our birth as a nation as it was militias that started the Revolutionary War. The vast majority of firearms in private hands have never killed anyone. An abortion on the other hand is the killing in the womb of a pregnant woman (and sometimes as with Kermit Gosnell, the removal of the baby and subsequent killing outside of the womb) of an unwanted human child. An abortion has no other purpose than to kill an unwanted human child. The only abortions that did not result in the death of a human are failed (I'll say defective) ones. Our constitution, in the due process clause of the 5th Amendment clearly states that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law". The one exception to that would be in the matter of self defense, which is considered a natural right. A firearm is the ideal weapon of choice in a self defense situation, especially if you have multiple attackers. An abortion can be used in rare circumstances to protect the life of the mother, but most frequently, it is used as a tool of convenience to kill "unwanted children". There is no doubt that the child killed is it's own distinct entity as it has DNA unique from the mother's, and that same DNA proves that whatever state of development the child is in, it is human. Explain to me, which of our capital offenses that a fetus could violate, and then explain to me how this violation could be so egregious as to allow a circumventing of our constitution to allow the child's mother to decide to employ a "doctor" to kill said fetus without trial or even an administrative hearing. In short, a firearm can be a weapon, yes, and it is most often used for hunting and self defense. An abortion is also a weapon, but it has no other purpose and is only used against the most vulnerable people; the unborn.

From an individual rights perspective (liberals love to try this one too), they argue that a mother has the right to control her body. This is a fallacious argument; individual freedom is commonly boiled down to the right to swing your fist so long as it does not hit someone else's nose. In the case of an abortion, we have 2 individuals, the mother and the child. When a mother chooses to have an abortion, it infringes upon the child's right to life, a right that all of us hold as sacrosanct, without the idea of a right to life, the concept of self defense would be destroyed as would the concept of any other right because if you do not have the right to live, you have nothing. This is why being pro gun and pro life are very congruent positions, if you believe in the right to life, you should also therefore believe in a right to self defense.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

sts713 said:


> If you watched the movie you would know thats not what its about. the less unwanted children , the less crime.


I did watch the movie, and I also read the article. The article presents some interesting findings as well. You would do well to not dismiss an article before having read it first. Your response indicates a huge predisposition to dismiss evidence in favor of a political position. Kind of like the religious who dismiss evidence to the contrary in defense of their faith.


----------



## RideshareGuru (Nov 17, 2014)

sts713 said:


> Would rather an unformed embryo die than brother, father, friend. War is much worse than abortion


So, how do you put one form of human life over another? And who ever made the choice between abortion or war? As if legalizing abortion would stop wars? If you want to get rid of war, get rid of religion!


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> This gun talk is so alien to us here in the land of OZ.
> 
> 88 out of 100 Americans have guns. In Australia its only approx 15.


^^^
Where did you ever cook up that little "statistic"? 
You also drive on the wrong side of the street.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Optimus Uber said:


> I found a guy here in California, he trains peeps to get there ccw permit. So it is legal to carry concealed in California. The training certificate is $800. Its 4 two hour courses.


^^^
Legal if you can get a CCW issued. 
Good luck on that one.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Brady said:


> It's actually very difficult to get an automatic weapon in the United States. I'm not aware of any mass shootings that involved automatic weapons outside of a military context.
> 
> Secure storage of handguns away from domestic addresses would make them pointless for self defense. That's the premise of this thread.


^^^
Amusing that someone posting to this thread goes by the name of "Brady'. Hah!


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

RideshareGuru said:


> Interesting screenname for someone who is obviously pro-gun, lol.


^^^
Ooop's..... you beat me to that comment. lol


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Wow! This thread has gone deep and meaningful! I had to look up what Statist meant - Geez, I did not think I had this new identity! I believe there are some situations where I would trust a Government agency with their stated public service charter ahead of secretive privately owned companies run by megalomaniacs.
> 
> If government policy protects both consumers and the workforce in an everyday transaction - then I must be a Statist.
> 
> A transport transaction that increasingly becoming controlled by a company that has a history of putting its workers at risk of citations and legal action for the benefit of their goals - then I guess I'm a Statist


^^^
My mild dyslexia kicked in for a second and I thought you said that you were a Satanist.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Lidman said:


> Or just bring a knife that's most likely going to be bigger then the perps, so if you get accosted by him with his knife, you pull out yours out and tell him now this IS a KNife.


^^^
Yeh.... I like watching reruns of Highlander too.


----------



## BlkGeep (Dec 7, 2014)

I personally carry a Walther LCP in .380 it has a six round mag with ten and fifteen round extended mags available. The LC9 is slightly larger, with a few more options if you prefer a nine millimeter. It's tiny, yet still feels right in my large man hands, plus it's so light and small I carry it in my pocket regularly, even with no belt its not an issue.


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Yeh.... I like watching reruns of Highlander too.


Crocodile dundee


----------



## BlkGeep (Dec 7, 2014)

Crocodile Dundee came from Australia so he carried a big knife to make up for his small penis. In the US where we still have the right to carry guns it's perfectly reasonable to compensate for a small penis with a big gun. When I don't care about concealment I carry a gold plated desert eagle.


----------



## Brady (Oct 6, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Amusing that someone posting to this thread goes by the name of "Brady'. Hah!


As my day job, I'm the executive director of the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners, our state's largest pro-gun organization. I'm the butt of that joke all the time.


----------



## uber genesis (Nov 24, 2014)

not sure if it's legal in CA but i carry an Springfield XDS 45mm with laser sight..never leave home without it...or it's son..springfield XDM 9mm with either the 13 or 19 round clip..also equipped with the laser sight


----------



## Nick tardy (May 13, 2015)

1. Shooting to wound is a great way to spend 25- life in prison.

2. There is not an endledd supply of cops to magically poof to every call that comes in. Yes waiting sucks, but it happens.

3. Buying a gun outside of cali and bringing it back to use for SD is probably not the best idea. Follow the laws to keep your add covered


----------



## Nick tardy (May 13, 2015)

Good lord. Some of the comments here are why gun control laws are in place.


----------

