• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

PSA: There are legitimate uses for firearms that do not involve uses against people

SViper

SViper

Senior member
I am tired of all of the gun-bashing threads and posts that show that a gun's primary purpose is to use against people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy#Tools

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote#Livestock_and_pet_predation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_lion#Livestock_predation

I mention this because I live in an area of USA (Mid/Southern Texas) where having a firearm to protect your life, your family's lives, and your livelihood (as a rancher) is safer and more cost-effective than another type of weapon. The primary use of the firearm is for protection against animal predators, not people. Would you have a rancher protect his livestock from a coyote or mountain lion with a spear?
 
Apologies for disagreeing, but killing is not a valid use of anything.

Flame suit on!

flame_suit.jpg
 
Demo24 said:
Yes, that angry bear should maul you to death.
Click to expand...

No, that he shouldn't. But from what the OP said it doesn't seem to be a bear attack vs gun scenario, but rather a that coyotes on my land scenario.

zerocool84 said:
This

Because so if someone tries to attack you to steal your wallet or jewelry it's better to just let them kill you. Everyone knows this.
Click to expand...

So in america all wallet thieves execute their victims afterwards?
 
HAL9000 said:
Apologies for disagreeing, but killing is not a valid use of anything.

Flame suit on!

flame_suit.jpg
Click to expand...

How would you propose that a rancher defend his livestock against predators? Keep in mind that this is how he makes his living. If predators kill all of his livestock, he's out of a job and can't support himself or his family.
 
HAL9000 said:
So in america all wallet thieves execute their victims afterwards?
Click to expand...

What? I agreed with you. You never hear of people being murdered or something trivial on the news or anything like that. No one gets murdered walking down the street or anything like that. It's all a fabrication of the media. No one needs to protect themselves.
 
HAL9000 said:
No, that he shouldn't. But from what the OP said it doesn't seem to be a bear attack vs gun scenario, but rather a that coyotes on my land scenario.
Click to expand...

And yet again you take hypothetical situations and attempt to make them directly applicable to whatever is said in the thread. You should get your sarcasm meter fixed. That sentence was a hypothetical but mostly sarcastic response to your incredibly annoying and repetitive statements on these issues.
 
Demo24 said:
And yet again you take hypothetical situations and attempt to make them directly applicable to whatever is said in the thread. You should get your sarcasm meter fixed. That sentence was a hypothetical but mostly sarcastic response to your incredibly annoying and repetitive statements on these issues.
Click to expand...

Oh sorry, I took what you meant literally could you rephrase, unfortunately without any real life examples to run with I have to use hypotheticals.
 
zerocool84 said:
What? I agreed with you. You never hear of people being murdered or something trivial on the news or anything like that. No one gets murdered walking down the street or anything like that. It's all a fabrication of the media. No one needs to protect themselves.
Click to expand...

Either my sarcasm meter is broken or you disagree with me.

Either way. My response is the same: OK fair enough.
 
SViper said:
How would you propose that a rancher defend his livestock against predators? Keep in mind that this is how he makes his living. If predators kill all of his livestock, he's out of a job and can't support himself or his family.
Click to expand...

Fence.
 
OCGuy said:
This forum has deteriorated into this mess because of a single troll...

Sad. Just....sad.
Click to expand...

It's quite amazing that someone can just about ruin a forum all by themselves. He has made visits to OT painful, it really does suck. I wish he would just leave or be banned, he is a cancer to these forums.
 
I love how neckbeard thinks those who support the private ownership of firearms are paranoid. I'm more on the side of those who live based on hypotheticals are the paranoid ones.
 
nick1985 said:
It's quite amazing that someone can just about ruin a forum all by themselves. He has made visits to OT painful, it really does suck. I wish he would just leave or be banned, he is a cancer to these forums.
Click to expand...

I didn't do it, I post the odd thread, people always WANT to argue with me about gun control etc... Not my fault.
 
SViper said:
What kind of fence can you build to keep out a predator that is adept at climbing and has an 18 ft vertical leap?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar#Physical_characteristics

The type of fence required to keep a cougar out would no longer be cost-effective for the rancher.

Barb wire fences are used because they are cheap, but their primary purpose is keeping the livestock in, not predators out.
Click to expand...

I've said it before and i'll say it again, just because it's cheaper to kill something doesn't make it OK.
 
SViper said:
I am tired of all of the gun-bashing threads and posts that show that a gun's primary purpose is to use against people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy#Tools

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote#Livestock_and_pet_predation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_lion#Livestock_predation

I mention this because I live in an area of USA (Mid/Southern Texas) where having a firearm to protect your life, your family's lives, and your livelihood (as a rancher) is safer and more cost-effective than another type of weapon. The primary use of the firearm is for protection against animal predators, not people. Would you have a rancher protect his livestock from a coyote or mountain lion with a spear?
Click to expand...

all of this is very true. But I think people say "primary purpose" in reference to why guns exist? the technology, the R&D, etc.

what was the need for Guns?

military. killing of people. that is why we have guns, that is why they were developed.

But sure, of course you can shoot anything you want with them. small furry animals, coyotes, cans, people. whatever.

they do not discriminate, that's for sure.
 
HAL9000 said:
Oh sorry, I took what you meant literally could you rephrase, unfortunately without any real life examples to run with I have to use hypotheticals.
Click to expand...


What real life example do you need to know that a big ass black bear coming at you is going to fuck you up? "oh hai, that bear looks friendly I think I'll stand here and see what it wants 🙄"

I purposely didn't add anything else cause that sentence can go two ways:

"you" should get mauled, or a sarcastic/hypothetical person.
 
Fences do not work. Coyotes can jump them or go under them. Cattle can and will knock a fence down. And they require constant maintenance. Most farmers / ranchers do have them but weapons are needed to protect against predator animals. And I would expect a response like Hal9000 posted as he is an Englander, where they banned all guns for the public and while police carry them, they are discouraged from their use. But the Crimminals will still carry and use guns in a commission of a crime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top