07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 160161162163164 ...
tools
  1. Aquila's Avatar
    Oh, blanks are definitely dangerous. They often contain more powder than regular rounds. This allows them to create a bigger flash than normal to give a more dramatic appearance on film. Still, the heat, noise, and gas pressure from firing a blank is still dangerous by itself at close range.

    I wouldn't routinely recommend bluffing as a means of defense. However, it does present some interesting scenarios. For example, let's compare two individuals. Both are openly carrying a pistol on a hip holster. Anyone can plainly see that they are carrying a weapon. However, only one individual is carrying an actual pistol. The other individual is carrying a replica pistol. Would both individuals have the same chance of being attacked? Remember, the claim is that merely showing a weapon without shooting it can save lives.

    I suspect most criminals would assume that both individuals are armed and just move on. They would rather find someone who is unarmed.
    Perhaps the argument could be made for carrying a replica as a deterrent, although I would suggest two things to go along with it: 1. Don't get into situations where being attacked by an armed assailant is probable 2. Carry a real weapon in case the bluff is called. If this were to catch on in a major way, then the perception in the minds of assailants could be to "chance it" if everyone appears armed, but only a small fraction are actually so.

    About 80% of self defense is mentality about how to conduct oneself in a reasonable manner that avoid conflict. The last 20% is how to respond once things escalate to where there is no reasonable alternative. Your hypothesis seems centered in the 80%, however I would argue that one could much easier avoid situations where the only deterrent to being attacked would be the visibility of a weapon. If that's your best defense, or even a central part of your defense strategy, in my opinion, you're doing something wrong.

    Of course, this measure would do nothing to address the last 20%, in which case my opinion would be that this methodology is 100% wrong for most people, and perhaps up to 20% right for a very specific scenario, perhaps such as someone who's tasked with transporting money without adequate protection, etc. In that scenario, it is still my opinion that actually carrying would be about 5x more effective as a measure, given that if your 80% fails, you're still able to respond to a credible threat.
    12-16-2013 06:38 AM
  2. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    Oh yeah, I can see this...

    Bad Guy: This is a stick-up! Give me your money!

    Good Guy: You don't want to rob me.

    Bad Guy: Why is that?

    Good Guy: Because I am armed. See? *shows gun*

    Bad Guy: $&! My plan is foiled! *runs away*

    The morale is, unless you're prepared to use it, having a gun is pretty much pointless.
    nolittdroid likes this.
    12-16-2013 06:50 AM
  3. llamabreath's Avatar
    Oh yeah, I can see this...

    Bad Guy: This is a stick-up! Give me your money!

    Good Guy: You don't want to rob me.

    Bad Guy: Why is that?

    Good Guy: Because I am armed. See? *shows gun*

    Bad Guy: $&! My plan is foiled! *runs away*
    LOL



    This is a signature.
    12-16-2013 11:48 AM
  4. NoYankees44's Avatar
    NEVER bluff having a gun in a defense situation. Especially with a real but unloaded gun.

    When a gun is brought into a situation, that situation is automatically escalated to a new level. You are threatening whoever's life, and they will react accordingly. That means them possibly going to lengths that they would not have otherwise in order to protect themselves. So if they have a gun themselves, they might then use it even though they had no intention before you threatened their life. Now the situation is escalated and you have no way to defend yourself.

    Long story short, do not use a gun if you are not prepared to take a life. Do not grab a gun if you do not plan to use it.
    nolittdroid, Scott7217 and UJ95x like this.
    12-16-2013 02:57 PM
  5. Aquila's Avatar
    Welcome back. Please keep discussions civil and on topic. If you do not like a post, please ignore it and move on or, if you feel it violates forum rules, please hit the report button. Personal attacks, backseat moderating and/or disruptive posting are all unacceptable.

    Thanks!
    TomsAndroid likes this.
    12-16-2013 05:27 PM
  6. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    "Can I just mention that this is the first time I've appeared on television?"

    "No, sorry. There isn't time..."
    12-16-2013 06:02 PM
  7. Fairclough's Avatar
    Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm guns.

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    12-16-2013 07:49 PM
  8. Zetaprime's Avatar
    In America the guns are already out there. There's no way to 'put the genie back in the bottle'. The guns are always going to be available legally or otherwise. The problem wherein some people feel disenfranchised is what needs to be addressed. Also the way America deals with the mentally I'll needs to change. Many of these problems started when the state hospitals were emptied and the mentally I'll were thrown out on to the streets to fend for themselves. The younger people still in school are still marginalized.


    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
    12-16-2013 08:15 PM
  9. alexlam24's Avatar
    America is so used to shootings that we don't even bother covering them anymore. The shooting that happened a couple days ago? Media isn't even caring about it any more.

    Sent from my HTC Xperia S4
    Fairclough likes this.
    12-16-2013 11:11 PM
  10. Fairclough's Avatar
    Its possible to put the genie in the bottle. We were in the exact same spot. The difference is we changed our view of what gun use is acceptable for, what we can obtain it for and limited access to weapons which fire rapidly and those which did for cattle farmers limited the rounds.


    To a previous question. Jan 26 is Australia day, mainly a day were most livers get destroyed.
    A little light humour on the issue above for the closure of the thread. This video is slightly funny and worth a watch,
    ( )
    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    12-17-2013 03:10 AM
  11. qxr's Avatar
    Perhaps we could try to identify why certain people resort to firing a gun to solve a problem. Plus acknowledge and treat mental illness.

    Sent from my SCH-I545 using AC Forums mobile app
    TomsAndroid likes this.
    12-17-2013 08:47 AM
  12. Rolandrice's Avatar
    I still don't understood about this thread ?
    12-17-2013 08:56 AM
  13. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    I still don't understood about this thread ?
    Huh? That sentence is incomplete.
    TomsAndroid likes this.
    12-17-2013 06:49 PM
  14. llamabreath's Avatar
    Huh? That sentence is incomplete.
    It appears to me that English is not his first language, and therefore consequently cannot garner the full impact of said thread.

    Maybe, with further questioning, he will offer-up a continuance of inquisitive, sensory-arousing inquests, but my personal feeling is such that it was solely a lone soul merely passing abreast, amidst.



    This is a signature.
    12-17-2013 09:20 PM
  15. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    It appears to me that English is not his first language, and consequently cannot garner the full impact of said thread.
    That may or may not be the case, as I know plenty of native English speakers who write poorly.

    Maybe, with further questioning, he will offer up a continuance of inquisitive, sensory-arousing inquests, but my personal feeling is such that it was solely a lone soul merely passing abreast, amidst.
    And that, sir, is a response which warms the cackles of my English Major heart.
    cdmjlt369, qxr and TomsAndroid like this.
    12-17-2013 09:29 PM
  16. Scott7217's Avatar
    One fact that I think puts the issue in stark release. In America every year 800 k - 1.5 M crimes/lives are saved by the display of an weapon, not the shooting of it but the display of it.
    Long story short, do not use a gun if you are not prepared to take a life. Do not grab a gun if you do not plan to use it.
    That's good advice, NoYankees44. I'm just wondering how displaying a weapon without firing it can save lives.
    JohnnytheK likes this.
    12-17-2013 10:24 PM
  17. anon5664829's Avatar
    That may or may not be the case, as I know plenty of native English speakers who write poorly.


    And that, sir, is a response which warms the cackles of my English Major heart.
    That heart will be destroyed rather soon.

    Posted via Android Central App
    12-18-2013 01:38 AM
  18. Aquila's Avatar
    Let's try to move things back on a generally more on topic direction.
    Scott7217 likes this.
    12-18-2013 04:02 AM
  19. Fairclough's Avatar
    Sorry Matt.
    I find this interesting, in the states you guys express your rights are given to you by a piece of paper (constitution) over here our rights are due to a lack of paper and what is omitted from the constitution, as our piece of paper states the rights the government has.

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    12-18-2013 04:33 AM
  20. Aquila's Avatar
    Sorry Matt.
    I find this interesting, in the states you guys express your rights are given to you by a piece of paper (constitution) over here our rights are due to a lack of paper and what is omitted from the constitution, as our piece of paper states the rights the government has.

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    So the inverted observation I'd agree is interesting, and I sorta like it.

    But to clarify, we don't believe that the paper grants us right, it just expresses and enumerates rights that we have by virtue of being human. Now, there is an interesting question that I've asked here (to no avail) as to why a person born in Florida is assumed to have these human rights, while a person born 90 miles away in Cuba or someone from England is not (that's not the Founder's opinion, Jefferson, Paine, etc. all believed these rights applied to all humans, but modern Americans seem to think of them as rights for citizens of the United States only).

    Our constitution is meant to convey the exact limits of government by specifying what they are ALLOWED to do, and the bill of rights ought to be viewed as additional constraints upon what they actually do. Of course, in reality approximately everything that our government does is extra-constitutional.

    There is of course a logic hole, in that they're essentially stating that the concept of citizenship bestows rights, in which case ... they do receive them as a gift from the government, rather than ordering the government to recognize their inherent inalienable rights that would require universal recognition of those rights to apply to all humans... something that would require us to rethink our foreign policies. Might be the subject for another thread, but that single fallacy in logical consistency is probably responsible for the majority of confusion on all issues of human rights (so approximately everything).
    Fairclough and TomsAndroid like this.
    12-18-2013 04:44 AM
  21. anon8126715's Avatar
    What I find humorous about those that will scream until they're blue in the face about their 2nd amendment rights is when they pretend that they're the last bastion of freedom in this country because they help keep the government at bay with their 20 rifles and hand guns. Back when the original document was drafted people only had access muskets and cannons for the most part. The amount of firepower the government had access to wasn't much better than the amount the ordinary citizen could possess. Most of what a citizen has access to today can't even compare to some of the weapons our government has access to, thus it's beyond me why people think that their access to a rifle or a gun is a match for the government's slew of tanks, airplanes, nuclear and biological weapons.

    What I've noticed from some of the staunchest gun rights supporters I know is that they tend to use their ownership of a gun as some form of expression of manhood (albeit a sad one). Some of the people I've had heated discussions regarding gun rights weren't the best physical example of what it means to be a man and I think therein lies part of the problem and part of the reason that some people are so passionate about it. If you take a sampling of those people that are the staunchest supporters of gun rights, you find a pattern, mostly middle to older aged men. You can't really blame them for fighting for their right to carry around something that to them is an expression of their manhood during a time in their life where the things we as a society identify as "Manly" are on the decline.

    Typically when I mention my observations on this topic to some of my 2nd-amendment friends, I can practically see the blood pressure build in their eyes and the name calling tends to begin, which all it does is reinforces my belief that maybe I'm onto something.
    12-18-2013 06:58 AM
  22. anon8126715's Avatar
    Not sure if it was already mentioned, but I'd like to see an explicit voting rights amendment. Considering our government enacts a lot of laws that seems to favor special interest groups and how much some of our political entities try to erode votes via voting laws, I'd like to see some basic federal legislation that prevents states from stripping away voting rights.
    msndrstood likes this.
    12-18-2013 07:11 AM
  23. Fairclough's Avatar
    Nothing is true in short I will answer your question. Money. Governments don't want to have people 'using' their system. Although I would debate the best economic times ran of having the greatest influx of immigrants, one could argue one cause the other. I would say a new immigrant is better then most born here. Why? Because they are willing and wanting to work for a better life then someone who views it as a right.

    The above post I had a little giggle, although its not completely politically correct I am imagining so many examples of were your observations have matched some of mine.

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    12-18-2013 07:38 AM
  24. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    What I find humorous about those that will scream until they're blue in the face about their 2nd amendment rights is when they pretend that they're the last bastion of freedom in this country because they help keep the government at bay with their 20 rifles and hand guns. Back when the original document was drafted people only had access muskets and cannons for the most part. The amount of firepower the government had access to wasn't much better than the amount the ordinary citizen could possess. Most of what a citizen has access to today can't even compare to some of the weapons our government has access to, thus it's beyond me why people think that their access to a rifle or a gun is a match for the government's slew of tanks, airplanes, nuclear and biological weapons.

    What I've noticed from some of the staunchest gun rights supporters I know is that they tend to use their ownership of a gun as some form of expression of manhood (albeit a sad one). Some of the people I've had heated discussions regarding gun rights weren't the best physical example of what it means to be a man and I think therein lies part of the problem and part of the reason that some people are so passionate about it. If you take a sampling of those people that are the staunchest supporters of gun rights, you find a pattern, mostly middle to older aged men. You can't really blame them for fighting for their right to carry around something that to them is an expression of their manhood during a time in their life where the things we as a society identify as "Manly" are on the decline.

    Typically when I mention my observations on this topic to some of my 2nd-amendment friends, I can practically see the blood pressure build in their eyes and the name calling tends to begin, which all it does is reinforces my belief that maybe I'm onto something.
    So, by your logic, the government should have access to your email and should be able to listen to your phone calls. Neither one of those existed when the constitution was written, and you shouldn't be able to have freedom of speech through either one of those outlets either.


    And maybe people get upset with you trying to take away one of their rights like a 6 year old because you don't like something. That's like me trying to outlaw vehicles because I don't like them.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    qxr likes this.
    12-18-2013 07:51 AM
  25. Fairclough's Avatar
    I presume you walk everywhere then? :

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    12-18-2013 08:01 AM
4,617 ... 160161162163164 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD