Armed citizens

[FightingFat]

Is it pointless to wear a seatbelt if you have never been in a car accident? Is it pointless to have fire insurance if you’ve never had a fire? Is it pointless to lock your doors if you have never been robbed?

It’s bizzare to me that you correlate guns with safety devices. It’s an excuse (and a poor one at that).

If you are placed to the test and are found lacking and if that were not the case if you been armed with a firearm, then, yes you WILL HAVE failed in your Catholic DUTY.

Ok so now you’re telling me I’m going to hell because I don’t own a gun?

 

[FightingFat]

And if you encounter someone who is bigger, stronger, faster, better trained and/or out-numbered, what will you do then?

These things don’t apply to self defense with guns? People don’t have bigger guns? People aren’t faster on the draw? No one can come up behind you and shoot you in the back?

 

[FightingFat]

Fighting Fat, himself has said that the only purpose of guns is to kill. That being the case, he must admit the only purpose of his training in martial arts is to beat and brutalize people.

Why? A gun fires a bullet. When you train chi sau, you’re playing a game. The level you take it too is your own business. In training a martial art, you are as much learning to co-operate as anything else.

But Fighting Fat, himself has said that the only purpose of guns is to kill. That being the case, he must admit the only purpose of his training in martial arts is to beat and brutalize people.

Non sequitor.

 

[Sir_Knight]

It’s bizzare to me that you correlate guns with safety devices. It’s an excuse (and a poor one at that).

A gun is a TOOL which, if used properly, can ensure your safety. I see it as a perfect comparison.

Ok so now you’re telling me I’m going to hell because I don’t own a gun?

I’m not one to judge what happens to those that fail to perform a GRAVE DUTY but I would think that it is not a laughing matter nor something to be taken lightly.

The church DOES officially teach that we have a GRAVE DUTY to protect ourselves and in MOST CASES the BEST means of defense will be a firearm. Those are the facts.

 

[Sir_Knight]

These things don’t apply to self defense with guns? People don’t have bigger guns? People aren’t faster on the draw? No one can come up behind you and shoot you in the back?

If you are able to defend yourself with the BEST MEANS POSSIBLE, then you have fulfilled your GRAVE DUTY. If there was something else that you COULD have done but did not because you were not prepared to do so, then you have FAILED to fulfill your GRAVE DUTY.

If I walked around with a machine gun, I would be better armed than with just a handgun but it would be difficult, if not impossible, to effectively conceal a machine gun during regular activities and it would be illegal to carry one. Thus, it would not be possible to be armed with one. If one lives in a place where guns are not allowed, again, it would not be possible to arm oneself with one.

But if one IS able to arm oneself and fails to do so, that is another matter.

 

[FightingFat]

OK, sorry Sir Knight, this is where I bow out. I really can’t follow you to where you’ve gone now with this.



Byeee!

 

[Sir_Knight]

Why? A gun fires a bullet. When you train chi sau, you’re playing a game. The level you take it too is your own business. In training a martial art, you are as much learning to co-operate as anything else.

A gun fires a bullet IF the trigger is pulled. In an overwhelming majority of cases where a gun is used for defensive purposes, not a single shot is ever fired – merely the presence of a gun is enough to end the confrontation.

Can the same thing be said about martial arts training? Or, does violence have to be used? Looking at it from that perspective, it can be said that a firearm is actually the less violent approach of the two in MOST cases.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I really can’t follow you to where you’ve gone now with this.

What part? I’ll be more than happy to explain it to you.

OK, sorry Sir Knight, this is where I bow out.

As you wish.

 

[vern_humphrey]

These things don’t apply to self defense with guns? People don’t have bigger guns?

I love it – people who know nothing about guns always somehow assume that “a bigger gun” is an advantage!

People aren’t faster on the draw?

You think we have fast draw contests in the middle of the street at high noon, do you?

No one can come up behind you and shoot you in the back?

Someone can always catch you unawares – just like your house can catch fire while you’re asleep. But that doesn’t negate the concept of having a fire extinguisher, now does it?

 

[Iowa_Mike]

I love it – people who know nothing about guns always somehow assume that “a bigger gun” is an advantage!

You think we have fast draw contests in the middle of the street at high noon, do you?

Someone can always catch you unawares – just like your house can catch fire while you’re asleep. But that doesn’t negate the concept of having a fire extinguisher, now does it?

Vern,

What great answers LOL. I personally carry a .380Sig in a ‘small of the back’ holster or a 9 mil Glock in an ‘inside the back belt holster’ or a .45 derringer depending on the situation. The use of these guns is purely self defense.

There is no arguing with a person who is anti-gun until they find themselves in a situation where they badly need one. From my perspective, if someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night they are not there with good intentions and bring upon themselves whatever happens.

Iowa Mike

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern,

What great answers LOL. I personally carry a .380Sig in a ‘small of the back’ holster or a 9 mil Glock in an ‘inside the back belt holster’ or a .45 derringer depending on the situation. The use of these guns is purely self defense.

There is no arguing with a person who is anti-gun until they find themselves in a situation where they badly need one. From my perspective, if someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night they are not there with good intentions and bring upon themselves whatever happens.

Iowa Mike

Funny how owning a gun is bad, but practicing to beat people up is good, isn’t it?

Reminds me of an old saying, “Gun control is based on the proposition that a 105 lb woman can fist-fight a 240 lb attacker.”

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Reminds me of an old saying, “Gun control is based on the proposition that a 105 lb woman can fist-fight a 240 lb attacker.”

My karate teacher (Uncle Herbivore) said that, if you want to defend yourself, then get a gun.

Btw, I am not sure how useful it is for a 105 lb woman to take martial arts in order to defend herself against a 240 lb attacker. It tends to make her over-confident. But doing nothing is also dangerous.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

In training a martial art, you are as much learning to co-operate as anything else.

You are learning to not be there.

 

[vern_humphrey]

My karate teacher (Uncle Herbivore) said that, if you want to defend yourself, then get a gun.

Btw, I am not sure how useful it is for a 105 lb woman to take martial arts in order to defend herself against a 240 lb attacker. It tends to make her over-confident. But doing nothing is also dangerous.

Be not afraid of any man
No matter what his size
When danger threatens, call on me
I will equalize.

– Samuel Colt

 

[mgrobertson79]

My karate teacher (Uncle Herbivore) said that, if you want to defend yourself, then get a gun.

Btw, I am not sure how useful it is for a 105 lb woman to take martial arts in order to defend herself against a 240 lb attacker. It tends to make her over-confident. But doing nothing is also dangerous.

This is akin to a 2000 pound car cutting off an 80000 pound truck. The car really stands no chance of winning without some quick thinking and even quicker reaction. If both don’t go just right, the car becomes a pancake.

 

[rstegeman]

Why? A gun fires a bullet. When you train chi sau, you’re playing a game. The level you take it too is your own business. In training a martial art, you are as much learning to co-operate as anything else.

The same applies to a gun. The level you take it to is your own business. In many martial arts you are taught maneuvers and tactics that could easily deliver a killing blow. Even though you are taught to use it only defensively, what stops an individual from doing otherwise?

As for playing a game, you don’t think that some gun owners are doing the exact same thing? I know some that ONLY use it a firing ranges to see how accurate they are and they compete with their friends, much like darts.

Please address this hypothetical situation: You and your family are being attacked by an individual. Using your Chi Sau, you engage and subdue the attacker. Another person and their family are attacked, and he uses his gun, shoots the attacker in the arm or leg and stops the attack.

In both situations, the attack was thwarted in non-lethal ways and in both, some level of violence was used to do so. What exactly is the difference?

 

[vern_humphrey]

The same applies to a gun. The level you take it to is your own business. In many martial arts you are taught maneuvers and tactics that could easily deliver a killing blow. Even though you are taught to use it only defensively, what stops an individual from doing otherwise?

As for playing a game, you don’t think that some gun owners are doing the exact same thing? I know some that ONLY use it a firing ranges to see how accurate they are and they compete with their friends, much like darts.

Please address this hypothetical situation: You and your family are being attacked by an individual. Using your Chi Sau, you engage and subdue the attacker. Another person and their family are attacked, and he uses his gun, shoots the attacker in the arm or leg and stops the attack.

In both situations, the attack was thwarted in non-lethal ways and in both, some level of violence was used to do so. What exactly is the difference?

Actually, in the case of using martial arts, it is highly likely the defender will have to injure the attacker. In the second case, the presense of a firearm is usually sufficient to stop the attack without firing a shot.

 

[rstegeman]

I just want to say two things:

1. I am enjoying this thread and the thought provoking discussions.
2. I want to apologize for less than good natured posts that I have made in this thread, especially to DaFrog. While wanting to engage in a good debate, I crossed the line.

Peace,
Rick

 

[Sir_Knight]

Reminds me of an old saying, “Gun control is based on the proposition that a 105 lb woman can fist-fight a 240 lb attacker.”

I am not sure how useful it is for a 105 lb woman to take martial arts in order to defend herself against a 240 lb attacker. It tends to make her over-confident. But doing nothing is also dangerous.

This is akin to a 2000 pound car cutting off an 80000 pound truck. The car really stands no chance of winning without some quick thinking and even quicker reaction. If both don’t go just right, the car becomes a pancake.

Not to take this thread off-topic but my daughter’s instructor can’t be more than 110-120 pounds and I’m around 265 but I definitely wouldn’t want to tangle with her

 

[mary_bobo]

I just want to say two things:

1. I am enjoying this thread and the thought provoking discussions.
2. I want to apologize for less than good natured posts that I have made in this thread, especially to DaFrog. While wanting to engage in a good debate, I crossed the line.

Peace,
Rick

It’s too bad all of us can’t be that humble. God bless.