I see that.
There is truth here, although guns are clearly part of the problem as the make violence a lot more dangerous and deadly. The truth there is that the US is generally more violent than pretty much every Western nation outside of Latin America. In the Americas its really Canada that is the outlier.
Totally get that, and agree. My sticking point is that the visceral desire to protect your loved ones at all costs comes with a ton of work and responsibility when the gun gets drawn. Talking the knife guy down might be the best way to get your loved one out alive, uncut by him and unshot by you.
Yep, we have a small minority of very very sick and sociopathic individuals. But vast majority of Americans are not like these people.There is truth here, although guns are clearly part of the problem as the make violence a lot more dangerous and deadly. The truth there is that the US is generally more violent than pretty much every Western nation outside of Latin America. In the Americas its really Canada that is the outlier.
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Murder isn't the best proxy for what I'm looking for, murder is easier with guns.
Im not a psychologist or a social worker. But I am a pretty good shot.
If you want your loved one out alive, ya becomes a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ social worker. Almost anyone can be talked down, if you get in their heads. If they are holding a knife on someone, they are not actively trying to kill them. They want something else. Figure out what it is, fast.
Or, you just shoot the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ with the knife.
I'm talking about the life of the innocent. You are talking about playing hero, with apparently little regard for your odds of successfully sniping your target, who is in intimate contact with the person you are trying to save. Have you considered a bullet passing through your target and hitting your loved one? You still gonna feel like Batman if the knife guy lives with a scar and your loved one is crippled or killed from your shooting?
I will say though that's often not exactly clear. When there is no longer any choice that is. I see a lot of armchair quarterbacking on these sorts of things, often including anecdotes about the time the writer experienced something similar and was an utter badass.
Yes, and I will use deadly force to protect them against armed sociopaths.
If you are not training with that gun daily, till you can quick draw and hit an apple at 30 feet, and have familiarized yourself with every conceivable scenario, knowing where you can and can't shoot, then you don't give a flying ◊◊◊◊ about your loved ones. You just want to be a hero. Being a handgun hero takes much more work than most people are willing to do.
Not even the most Liberal Progressive strong gun regulation state requires daily gun training. Your fantasy is silly and absurd.
You seem to be actively hallucinating. I didn't say anything about state regulation.
I think he is saying that he will not train regularly unless it is mandated by law.
I'm sure he trains. Once in a while, and with no actual close quarter firing consideration.
I trust the most Liberal Progressive anti-gun states to know how much is the minimum training someone should do to be able to deal with a situation.
I enjoyed target shooting when I was in military reserves in my younger days. Good proper training prior to shooting - you cannot fire a gun that you cannot disassemble, clean, and reassemble! Some serious firepower in some of those old weapons (see ETA below). I have never fired or owned a hand gun and as a civilian have never fired anything more powerful than a pellet gun. I am certainly not anti gun. I do enjoy feasting on the results of my friends hunting trips. But somehow have never been able to see fear of violence as a viable reason for gun ownership.
You don't think that self-protection and protecting others is a viable reason to own a gun? Interesting.
I don't trust them to know ◊◊◊◊ about ◊◊◊◊. And we were not remotely discussing that anyway.