Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Do handguns serve a purpose other than killing people? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (123)	9/22/1999 5:41:00 PM
From: j__z	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 289

Good writing, but I have got to disagree with ya... We gave them an inch in 1934, 1968, 1990, 1994 and look at where were at now. All gun essentially function the same. The same action you have in your hunting rifle was once used in a military rifle. Once they get done with any military style rifle your hunting rifle will be next. I responsibly own several military style rifles with 40 round clips etc., however just owning a hunting rifle would not make me any more or less responsible. Its not the type of gun you own, its whether you are responsible with them. As far as your handgun comments, I carry a concealed weapon that shoots a 9mm. I also carry one that shoot a .40 caliber. all have barrels shorter then the ones you describe. I don't carry a gun to go hunting, I carry one for protection. As far .45 to 9mm comment, same logic applied "If you can't handle the recoil .50 AE, you should carry mace". Sorry, not all people like the .45 round. I can shoot better with a .357 sig round then I can with a .45. People are built differently, my girlfriend can't hit anything with a 1911 model colt, but she can nail things at 15 to 25 yards with my 9mm Sig.

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (123)	9/22/1999 6:20:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 289

Allow me a dissenting opinion... regarding semi-auto rifles - why ban them? In good hands they are not a threat to anyone or anything. And there are forms of competition that REQUIRE them. As for handguns with short barrels ... many times these are the only viable concealed-carry pieces. My S&W Model 60 (357, 3 inch barrel) is quite accurate at 15 yards ... and I can't conceive of using it at longer ranges. As for the NRA ... I used to be offended at their apparently inflexible position until I looked for signs of flexibility on the side of the legislators. There is none in either camp ... and the NRA is the one championing my right/privilege to own ANY firearms. Without them I'm pretty sure they'd be busy rounding up the last few .22 single-shot rifles right around now ... so I'll take the "bad" with the good. Thanks for listening,

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (123)	9/22/1999 9:14:00 PM
From: augustus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 289

Long post, L3_aka_L3 "... Where the NRA and I part ways is I see their argument that if you give an inch, they will take a mile ... " And they would, although I agree on the barrel length and caliber with you, the 'give an inch, take a mile' argument convinces me. Last week I came between a black bear sow and her three cubs, and it was mighty comforting to have a large caliber handgun in my hand as I slowly backed away and waited for them to go their own way. (An agitated bear is an impressive sight!) If we go the 'mile' route, I'll be using a knife or a big stick or mace, not very appealing alternatives. "... 2 men a short time to litter out or bury a dead soldier, it took a team of over 50 to take care of a wounded soldier ..." That's a partial justification for the 223 caliber also, isn't it. It strikes me that you're negating your own argument. If you subscribe to the point made in the study that wounding, as opposed to killing, is good, then small calibers are good. I don't think the second amendment pertains to hunting! Did you know that in a recent survey 20% of those surveyed thought that if the sanctions (naval blockade?) imposed on Sweden weren't effective, American troops should be sent into Sweden!!! If the US has a population of 250 million, that would be 50 million folks (less those 18 and below)! Some of these folks vote and it would be my guess that they're voting for the democrats like Clinton and Boxer and Schumer (sp?). It's scary. The reason I bring that up is that people ignore, or are ignorant of, the most blatant facts. Indonesia is in the news now, before that it was Somalia, and of course Germany and to top it all off, Russia with over 20 million dead in Stalin's purges. On a lesser note, who can forget the televised pictures of the armed shopkeepers in our own, homegrown riots? Regards, Augustus

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (123)	9/23/1999 8:49:00 AM
From: Nate	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 289

actually i disagree, my wife has a 9mm as do i, the reason i stay with the 9mm instead of going back to my .45 is the fact of short range stopping power. the primary purpose of my and my wife's 9's are home protection. the 45 will punch through at short range, < 10 yds. now in a shoulder wound i would rather have a 9 stay rather than a 45 punch, and who said that you only could shoot a "bad guy" once. we also go out shooting about 2-3 times a month just to keep familiar with the weapon. i see buying a handgun for protection and never shooting it until someone breaks in a bad case. by not being familiar with the weapon you are looking for trouble. now for the NRA, good intentions but that is about it.