Oh no you don't. Despite what you just said (very nice, btw, TIGER BLOOD baby!) you totally ducked the point. What I said was deliberately crude and shocking, but it is in fact the exact same manner of violent analogy that you yourself used.

All witticisms aside, I challenge you to counter that.

Interesting perspective, Nigee. There are definitely cultural implications to consider.

Not even street cops in England have guns, right? Only SWAT and whatnot? Looks like the old empire is still ahead of us Americans in some ways.

Putin I'm still waiting for you to come down on Jack too for his disgustingly violent child abuse joke. What's good for the goose....

Youre always looking for others to give you an excuse to be a nasty human being.

Trolls gonna troll

I think I would buy a gun for fun (shooting practice) if I could but not for safety.
If I lived in an area where I thought it might be a good precaution to own a gun I would move :-)
The truth is of course guns don't kill, people do .
To be fair in England we lived for years with the threat of the IRA and their bombing campaigns but we were bombed so much during the 2nd World War that the attitude was 'let them do their worse'.
The difference is the IRA were fighting a political campaign where as an 18 year old with a gun high on crack and desperate for cash is a lot more scary.
Would you prefer your police replaced their guns with tasers so the criminals knew they had a chance to escape, do you think that would help change the culture?

As I told centurion1 long ago, if your only point is that I am an asshole, I won't argue against that (I'm probably being pretty hard on old Jack). But at least I can consider a viewpoint without it being tainted by personal dislike - which you apparently cannot. So tell me good sir, is there any difference between my analogy and Jack's?

The only thing scarier than an armed, desperate crackhead is an armed, desperate crackhead cornering you in a back alley and all you have for defense is a cell phone.

Nigee that is a really interesting thought. My instinct says yes.

GunF - do you know many people personally that have been cornered in a back alley by a desperate armed crackhead?

Yellowjacket, the difference is that I made a single comment, while you are going out of your way to demonstrate that you're a terrible human being. If you can't understand the difference between the two, my already low opinion of is headed through the floor.

I just wish you had the decency (ha, funny joke, I know) to admit you were out of line to talk about killing a *specific person* that we all know. But as most of us are aware, appealing to your better nature is a losing proposition.

Nigee, are you thick or something? An 18 year old high on drugs and desperate for cash has a good chance of buggering off after getting it. The IRA want to kill you to get attention. The IRA were bloody terrifying!

I'm going to guess that you were never prevented from going to school because of a bomb scare? Or that your dad was never one of the poor sods who volunteered to search an evacuated building for potential explosives because only people who work there would know the nooks and crannies a bomb could be hidden in? Or that your best mate's dad had to search under his car with a mirror before driving to work just because he had an office job with the MOD? Because if you had you'd never say anything so fucking stupid.

@ NigeeBaby

Okay, so apparently according to you an armed, desperate crackhead is scarier than the IRA (a ridiculous assertion as well), but there are not enough armed, desperate crackheads in the world to make gun ownership a reasonable solution.

Octavious you missed my point but to be fair I think your focus was primarily on the point you wanted to make, but that is good. I'll set them up, you knock them down.
I'll make the point again however as I think it's worth a 2nd try.
YJ suggested as a precaution that it might be a good idea to get armed just as a precaution and my juxtaposition was that in the UK we were under the threat of bombing for years in the UK with the IRA but didn't resort to a panic measure of arming all our police and our citizens even though the threat was real and present. I think rather than negate my point you actually unwittingly made it for me so thanks.
The real long-term answer the threat of increased criminality is to work on the cause and not the effect but I appreciate that in the USA successive govts. have failed to curb the menace and threat and fear that a proliferation of guns cause so in that scenario until the a president makes a stand and agrees to control the madness maybe arming yourself isn't such a mad-crazy thing to do. It never was the answer for the UK and I am eternally grateful for that fact.

You've not seen the guns our police have in Northern Ireland, have you Nigee? We armed all our police there, with really big guns. And when things got really bad we filled the streets with the regiments armed with rifles. In what sense does that support your point?

Firearms in the hands of responsible, qualified adults is not "madness". It's a smart thing to do.

You don't have money:...Glock 17
You have money:............Colt 1911
You like Wild West:........S&W 686
You are a terrorist:.........Ak 47
You are a beast:............Your own hands

Octavious, when I say UK I mean the mainland because I support a united Ireland. Tu be factually correct I should have said Great Britain or England.

England a mainland? Bwahahahahahaha!!!!!!! It's a fucking island not even big enough to get the designation "continent"!

Draug, mainland UK, you guys are a bit pedantic, is that time of your life again :-)

@Jack: I'll call your bluff right there. Of COURSE it's out of line to joke about shooting Putin. Again, I will not attempt to refute any claims that I am an asshole. I don't fight battles I can't win. That being said, appealing to my better nature actually works quite well, you can just read my dialogue with Nigee here if you have any doubts to that, or many others (Semck, Mafialligator, Draugnar, etc., probably you too someday) who I've had informative and respectful debates with while disagreeing. Insinuating that I might be a damaged individual who may be cause for "concern" is not a good way to begin that kind of dialogue. Granted, my introduction didn't exactly set a respectful tone, but Putty and I have a bit of a history of mutual disrespect.

Now, as I've already said, my disgustingly hyperbolic chain of analogy was done for a clear reason, a point I've already made and which you seem to me unable to address - I find your argument that you are somehow exempt because you "only made one comment," wanting, ESPECIALLY since my comments were only designed with the intent of demonstrating the falsehood of your claim that you prefer to keep the language of violence out of political speech.

Your use of violent terminology in your analogy was deliberate and you meant it. Are you in favor of child abuse? Are you in favor of beating up Republicans? Of course not! Everybody knows what you meant. Do I have any intention of shooting Putin, communist uprising notwithstanding? Nope. I just found it a bit ridiculous and self-righteous that you would condemn me for my words and then immediately do something similar (no, not the same, but the language of violence was in both), and then claim that "analogy" made it OK.

If your analogy was OK, then so was mine.

AK-47 is more of an insurgent weapon, terrorists need something more compact like vz. 61. Unless you go fucking manmode on all clearances and just parade around the town with assault rifles and bombs and shit in your bag like movie terrorists do.

I have a 7 shot S&W .357 Magnum currently, and I have to say that it is the finest firearm I've ever owned. I can shoot the eyes out with that beauty. Its weight and balance are perfect, and despite its amazing power, it is quite a joy to shoot.

Further, as you said, YJ, it is very low maintenance, and there is no chance of leaving that ever so dangerous round in the chamber. No spring, no jams, just a ultra reliable weapon. It's only downside, that I have seen, is that it's not the best for concealed carry. It's a bit bulky and heavy. But, it does scare the shit out anyone that sees it.

On another note, if you're looking for a home defense weapon, I recommend the Mossberg 18" Maverick 88 12 gauge. It's cheap -- $180 at Academy Sports -- but well made, easily modified with a myriad of accessories, and a 12 gauge is the ultimate close defense weapon.

@ MichiganMan

I'm not a fan of shotguns for home defense. You have to remember that 12 gauges are *loud*, especially inside. Firing a 12 gauge in an enclosed space without hearing protection will blow up your eardrums. Not to mention that you have to use birdshot unless you want to punch a lot of holes through several walls. Buckshot, slugs, and sabot slugs will all punch right through interior walls and may hit your neighbors or loved ones. Birdshot will probably stop the average intruder, but "probably" is not a word I like to use when referring to a weapon's stopping power.

People seem to have mixed feelings about shotguns for home defense. that *chck-chck* will make an intruder shit himself, but yeah it has its drawbacks. MichMan I really think the handgun will be more fun at the firing range. Wish I could afford a S&W.

@ Yellowjacket

Guns, even inexpensive ones, tend to hold their value quite well, especially with weapon and ammunition prices as high as they are.

You could get a 400 USD revolver next week, save up 600 dollars over the next six months, and cash in your revolver for a nicer one as funds permit.

Any firearm-related metallic noise is going to make an intruder shit himself. It doesn't need to be a shotgun. Shotguns have a ton of intimidation value, but unless you are in one of only a few very specific tactical situations (home defense is not one of those situations), a shotgun is the wrong choice as far as practicality is concerned.

And cocking the hammer back on a revolver is still pretty damned scary.