Anti-Gun People: What is the proper course of action if you are attacked?

Apparently you think that the majority of firearms are actually manufactured in the US

The case for banning alchohol and returning to the 1920s prohibition is stronger than any anti-gun nut argument, and would save far more children's lives in eliminating drunk driving.

 

Serpentine. Its called "serpentine".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2_w-QCWpS0

 

Seriously? You are still on that moldy nonsense?

Nobody is saying a person is "defenseless without a gun".If you are arguing against that STILL, its gettin' ridiculous.

 

The only one who has said that is Bower. Who, I must observe, STILL has not answered my question!

 

I'll use either E. Honda's hundred hand slap or otherwise just hit them with a Ryu Dragon punch. If those don't work I'll have to take out my gun and shoot them.



(really I don't have a gun tho)

 

Yes, I was joking. Anyway, I can not answer the original thread question asked because (1) it assumes the worst case scenario (2) that we would not re-adjust laws if this were the case (3) most importantly, I do not want to ban guns.

Also, this guy deserves no serious consideration or curtiousy in my opinion for the way he acted in my thread.

I see merely a statistical correlation between lax gun owers and dealers coupled with the number of owners in the US which MAY be the main reasons why so many more Americans are likely to die by firearms. A lot of people have challenged my thoughts on this but I've yet to really be convinced this is not worth pursuing in some sort of policy. All we have really are stats, and when for example it increases your chances (as a woman) to die by a firearm when one is brought into the home for protection, it's probably worth it to consider these types of facts. Hence, my theory is similar to drinking laws, to draw down demand by limiting owers to X number of guns and increase gun accountability throught the entire process.

Legal Buyers Are Suppliers

"nearly 35% obtained their guns from friends and family members — the largest single source of criminals' guns." -latimes.com
"39.2. Street/illegal source. 33.8. 39.6. Friends or family." -usdoj.gov
"Among the youth who had carried guns, 48% had been given or loaned the gun by a family member or friend." -princeton.edu

"Sheley and Write found that the leading sources of handguns were (1) borrowing from family member or friend (45% juv) (2) buying off the street 54% inmates); (3) buying from family member or friend 36% of inmates) (5) buying from gun shop (12% inmates) (6) Theft (15% of inmates)"

""Stolen guns account for only about 10% to 15% of guns used in crimes," Wachtel said. Because when they want guns they want them immediately the wait is usually too long for a weapon to be stolen and find its way to a criminal." - FRONTLINE PBS

"The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Several recent reports back up Wachtel's own studies about this" - FRONTLINE PBS

 

I'd use the best available thing I had at the time.. Hopefully that would be a gun.. It would be nice to have that available in a case like this.. Just to scare them away though, preferably.. Hopefully I wouldn't have to fire it.

I don't have a gun, so barring that obviously, most likely smash them with a lamp or something.. Whatever's near to hand. Even if just to distract while I rush.. If it's multiple guys I'd probably be screwed, and if it's just one guy but he's stealthy about it or otherwise has me in his site at the point I notice him, it would probably have to be overenthusiastic compliance with his demands, and try to be relaxed about it while I wait for a moment when they let their guard down and maybe make a move then and if it's abrupt enough maybe that will help. My planned spontaneous move would be higher quality than his reaction improvised response to it.. Of course if they know proper procedures for tying down a hostage and they are smart about it then I'd be in trouble anyway. As carefully as I plan the angle I'd still have the chance to get shot in the process of course.

Ultimately the best thing would just be to have a gun there.

 

Wait I thought of one more.. Fake gun.. If I can't afford a real gun maybe a nice toy gun properly painted.. As long as the lights are low it could work to scare them off all the same maybe, but it won't offer the certainty that a real firearm would have.

 

I'd go and find the nearest 4'6" woman to judo the hell out of the aggressor.

 

Well it must be a language difference then because if you say "no chance" here it means defenceless

- - - Updated - - -

Given all the "can't cope without a gun" posts I have read on here you would be better off

 

If it is multiple people you LEAVE - fast - get to the nearest point of safety i.e. a neighbour and you call the cops from there

The most common burglary is one or at most two people looking for a quick easy way to make money. They do not want a fight, they do not even want to be identified which is why they usually target unoccupied homes - you let them know you are there are most will take off at speed

 

Given all of the little women that are to be found on the internet who regularly kick the crap out of men four times their size, you may be right....that is, if you believe everything you read on the internet.

 

If the criminal has a gun, you're just s*** outta luck. Unless you're one of the two or three cases per year in this country who gets the drop on an unarmed home invader. I kinda like my chances of being struck by lightning at the same time I get a hole-in-one much better. But if you're worried about, have a gun ready.

 

Actually, there are between 830,000 and 2.45 million defensive gun uses per year in the US but let's not allow facts to get in the way.

 

Look - Australia has little women too - in fact given our Asian population we have a LOT of small women - they do not feel the need to have a gun to defned themselves - why do you?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh! Dear! You have been reading the NRA again haven't you??

That research was debunked YEARS ago

 

Did you ask them all individually? Quit speaking for other people.

Rapes per 100,000 people (2010):

Australia: 79.5

US: 27.3

Tell you what, when your country's rate of rape stops dwarfing that of third world countries then you can tell other "little women" how best to defend themselves.

No, I read a peer reviewed study conducted by Gary Kleck and just because you can find a pro gun control website that disagrees with the study doesn't mean that it was "debunked". Try a little intellectual honesty once in a while. You might like it.

 

Ah but in my mansion I have a pack of fierce dogs which are trained to attack without instructions and they will protect my wife and daughter so I don't need to offer them up.

 

Be sure to check your toaster for any blood or flesh, you don't want any diseases. On second thoughts it might just be best to put it aside, the police will want it for evidence.

 

Really? So having a gun is too dangerous but a pack of fierce dogs around a child is safe?

 

I imagine you're right about the majority of cases.. The only other reasons I can think of are, you upset a particular group of people somehow, or you're a hostage for a Hollywood action film.

If that's the case, they would likely be armed and you're best off cooperating than getting shot in the back. And if I had a gun I'd have to get an auspicious occasion to draw, which would be unlikely, so I probably would be passing the gun over if I've not managed to hide it somewhere in reach.

For me I don't really make friends or enemies so I wouldn't need the gun... Well except in the last year I made three enemies.. But those weren't my fault, I didn't do anything wrong in any case.

 

So given that the rapes committed in a home break-in are not a majority of rapes, they certainly do occur. So some number of rapes committed in home invasions id OK with you. Do you have a number for an acceptable level.

 

Your contention that you can subdue any male attacker, especially one with a weapon, is absolutely rediculous.

I my martial arts days we tried to train women to defend themselves because they thought that would make them invulnerable. Often as not, all their physical resistance got them was greater injury. Knee man in or near his groin, and unless you got a perfect shot, all you have done is (*)(*)(*)(*) him off.

 

The 830,000 figure was put forth by Time Magazine in a very recent issue. Time is not exactly right wing, and not exactly years ago.

You are wrong.

 

Good for you, that is an acceptable solution. However most can't aford the mansion with five dogs.

By the way if I was a criminal planning to rob you, I would case the place and then poison your dogs.

 

Lets see you come up with even one "cant cope without a gun"post.

There are a few, fortunately rare situations when a gun is in fact the only thing that will save a person who is in gravest extreme.

You have yet to acknowledge that obvious fact, as far as I know.

There are also a few rare cases where a person will lose their home if they dont have a fire extinguisher.

Its fine for you to talk judo or improvised weapon, or yelling NO and shoving someone.

I was confronted by 3 black teenagers, while riding a bicycle around the lake. They ran me off the road.

I would have had time to retrieve the revolver I bought, later of course.

At the time my only option was to run. Too bad for me there was a fence.

I did survive, at least. If you'd had a comparable experience I think it is very unlikely you'd see things the way the lucky have the luxury of seeing things.