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.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (39172)	3/14/2005 4:16:50 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

"Just the inkling I get...." I appreciate the exchange, and you are honestly discussing your thoughts, which is good. Unfortunately the statement above is all too accurate in how the anti-gun people came to their positions. "My attitude is that if you have pulled a gun, you should be 100% committed to using it according to its design. If not, you may be in trouble." This statement should say "100% committed to <the possibility of> using it according to its design". Otherwise you are stating that if you pull it you must shoot. The ideal situation (and one that is more likely than you think) is that the loser criminal would rather live than die, and the gun will have been used as it was designed. As a deterent. "I was thinking more of the hard core types, who can be very good at testing the resolve of their victims." If someone as absolutely intent on killing you and you do not know it, a gun most likely would not save you. I will suggest (rather strongly) that this is not the typical crime where a homeowner protects him/her self with a pistol. I would say less than 1 in 100 times would this be the case.