Quote:
Originally posted by Rick Lee
A gun does not have to discharge to defend one's life or property. The mere knowledge that an area is likely to have a high concentration of armed homeowners can discourage criminals. And lots of attacks are foiled when the attacked produces a gun, but doesn't even have to fire it. They sure have no deterrent in Wash. DC.
And Supe, guns don't shoot people.
|
A legislator I know back in my home town, a logging town in N. Idaho, once suggested a county ordinance requiring all homes to have a gun, and ammunition for that gun. I'm not necessarily in disagreement with the decision to own a gun and keep it in one's home. Right now, another friend of mine is trying to keep a handgun away from his adult son who is a meth addict. The meth addict is about as fixated on that gun as some of you guys seem to be. Oh, and one more thing. If I have a gun and someone breaks into my home, there will be no waving of the gun or warnings or discussions. The most I might do as a favor to the intruder (unlikely) is to cock the hammer of the gun audibly. The intruder would then have approximately one second to exit the residence. One of the problems with arming people is that they try to avoid shooting bad guys. If any of you have an armed wife, she needs to fire that gun as many times as it takes to get comfortable and.......(here's the important part).......she needs to be drilled that if there is ever a situation where she needs to point the gun at someone.......she needs to then pull the trigger. Don't point and then not shoot.
Yes, Byron. Absolutely. Guns are art.