[Praxius]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Defense is the most NATURAL RIGHT, not arms are the most natural method of defense. Try not to make the debate out of things I didn't say please.

I'm not trying to make a debate out of things you didn't say, which is why I said so above....

Not really debating here, just trying to see your perspective on this.

I'm not even in debate mode yet... I'm just trying to see where you stand on a few of my questions before I even begin to debate.

In response to the explination.... Very well, so if you agree on this.... and everybody has the right to defend themselves.... then where do you get the argument of having the right to own a firearm for your defense? Is this just personal choice of weapon?

This is what I was asking.... you explained one thing, but you didn't supply me an addiquate link between the right to defend and the right to own a firearm for that defense... why a firearm and not a tank? Why not biological weapons? what seperates firearms from the other categories of things that can produce injury and/or death?

A Glock 9mm. The Glock is easy to maintain, acceptably accurate, and cheap to feed so I can stay in practice. Its versatile for close combat, but limited in range. Most self-defense scenarios take place in less than 15 yards, and that distance can be closed fast, so I want something that has stopping power, as well as fast repeatability for continued fire if it is required.

A taser in which I spoke of could meet all those requirements, except a lesser chance of your target being killed..... which could be developed and distributed easily if there was a demand.

I am an old fashioned guy, prefer carbereutors to fuel injection, and firearms to high-tech gadgetry. I wouldn't gamble with my life. (I would however entertain having both.....)

You're already gambling with your life with the firearm to begin with...

• Target grabs your gun in a struggle and shoots you.
• Target is missed and someone else on the street is shot. They in turn decide to act on their right like your's and shoots back at you, now you have two people to worry about and since you shot first, you're not looking at an easy way out.
• Target grabs for your gun in a struggle and it falls to the ground and goes off hitting you or the target resulting in death.
• Target gets into a struggle with you and one person squeezes the trigger and one is shot at close range...... or misses and hits a bystander.
• Bullet Jams, you're now screwed, target sees you have a gun, you intentionally pulled the trigger to shoot at them, so they pull their gun and unload into your brains.
• Bullet rechocets and comes back and hits you in the head, killing you (That happened to me once..... but it was a pellet )

They couldn't. They can't.

They can and will.... you just don't wish to admit it. Get two prods from a taser lodged into your skin and have the peson on the other end hold down the trigger everytime you decide to move..... I'm sure you wouldn't make it far.

Or tell me.... do you have a personal vengence thing for those to interfeer in your life that you feel you must have a firearm to kill them in retribution? If not... then what's the point of fighting for a weapon that does just that? Are you that hard up in wanting to kill someone?

No? Then get a taser.

Yes, and petition to stop the government giving out free tasers squandering the taxpayers tax money.

Of course.... and how much of your tax dollars are already being squandered towards gun related crimes in your country?