What We Crazy Pilots do When Not Flying!!

jesse said:
Uh -- nowhere in this thread does it talk about any of that. There is a hell of a difference between defending your home and being in combat. But this thread is not about defending your home.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I just made the assumption about the need to stockpile assorted combat weapons here on our own soil. I didn't realize y'all are headed off to war.

I have a few weapons, such as a sword and a couple of knives, and one very old Winchester carbine. My favorite is my old Boken which I keep near my bed, with the intent of defending myself and my home. I'm way too old to head off to war with the rest of you.

My point was not about war or defending your family and home. It is about thinking real hard about squeezing off a round at another human, and how you will feel in later life about taking another's life.

The bulk of the weapons shown on this thread are not exactly hunting rifles, which is what got me to thinking about such things in the first place. I am not saying don't kill, all I'm saying is give it some serious thought.

John
 
John Baker said:
The bulk of the weapons shown on this thread are not exactly hunting rifles, which is what got me to thinking about such things in the first place. I am not saying don't kill, all I'm saying is give it some serious thought.

John
Click to expand...

Excellent advice, but keep in mind, some things which were perfected to prosecute war have given peacetime folks some fun.

Such as: :blueplane:

:cheerswine:
 
$9,000 worth of guns. I own just about one of every modern gun or pistol. State Farm Insurance for full value replacement, $130 a year.
 
John Baker said:
I'm sorry, I just made the assumption about the need to stockpile assorted combat weapons here on our own soil. I didn't realize y'all are headed off to war.

I have a few weapons, such as a sword and a couple of knives, and one very old Winchester carbine. My favorite is my old Boken which I keep near my bed, with the intent of defending myself and my home. I'm way too old to head off to war with the rest of you.

My point was not about war or defending your family and home. It is about thinking real hard about squeezing off a round at another human, and how you will feel in later life about taking another's life.

The bulk of the weapons shown on this thread are not exactly hunting rifles, which is what got me to thinking about such things in the first place. I am not saying don't kill, all I'm saying is give it some serious thought.

John
Click to expand...

No one here was talking about killing anyone. Nor was anyone saying they were making guns to head off to war. Don't jump to conclusions. Truth be told -- if you as a law abiding citizen did kill someone and you didn't go to prison you had a damn good reason to do so.

Some people own guns for defense - some people own guns because they like to shoot them - some people own guns because they think they look cool on the wall - some people own guns just because they want to own guns.
 
John Baker said:
My old marshal arts master died a few months ago at the age of 84. He started out as a grunt in the Marine Corps and fought in Korea in the 1950s. He then went on to become an attorney and also became an officer. While in Japan, he started martial arts training and eventually in later life became a 10th Dom.

Several weeks before he died he told me this: "If I could undo just one thing in my life, that would be the lives I've taken."

Give a whole lot of thought about "defending your home and family" and the way you are going to do it. What seems wise now, could become a tremendous burden to lug around for the rest of your own.

John
Click to expand...

Obviously, you haven't been reading my posts complimenting these guys on their lack of verbal combat preparedness in discussing their firearms. I personally think collecting firearms is a bit weird, but I have a pet snake and fold paper for fun, thus demonstrating the value of my own judgement process. Collecting firearms is legal, and can certainly be done safely.

That, and if someone did actually steel into my domicile and threaten the safety of myself or Mrs. Steingar, and I managed to pull a Rambo and somehow dismembered the hapless fellow, I suspect I'd loose little sleep. The me or him thing is pretty instinctive when you get down to it.

Of course, the above scenario is tremendously unlikely, as I'd be too busy running as fast as I can to pull anything more than a leg muscle.
 
steingar said:
Obviously, you haven't been reading my posts complimenting these guys on their lack of verbal combat preparedness in discussing their firearms. I personally think collecting firearms is a bit weird, but I have a pet snake and fold paper for fun, thus demonstrating the value of my own judgement process. Collecting firearms is legal, and can certainly be done safely.

That, and if someone did actually steel into my domicile and threaten the safety of myself or Mrs. Steingar, and I managed to pull a Rambo and somehow dismembered the hapless fellow, I suspect I'd loose little sleep. The me or him thing is pretty instinctive when you get down to it.

Of course, the above scenario is tremendously unlikely, as I'd be too busy running as fast as I can to pull anything more than a leg muscle.
Click to expand...

Just chucking the snake at said intruder would be as, if not more, effective than any gun....
 
jesse said:
No one here was talking about killing anyone.
Click to expand...

I have a concealed carry permit valid in Oklahoma and several other states. I carry a Glock 30 .45 ACP in my car and occasionally a snubby .357 Magnum in a special shoulder holster.

The last thing, and I mean the last thing I ever want to do is be forced to kill someone. Once you go there you can never come back. You better be damn sure you are legally in the right. Otherwise, keep your gun at home. Somebody breaks into my home in the middle of the night is dead, no questions asked or required by Oklahoma law. Home invasion falls into the same catagory. Your home is your castle, you may defend the inside of it with lethal force at any time. My preferred weapon is my Remington 1100 tatical shotgun. Eight in the tube and one in the pipe.....POW
 
David_L_Wilson said:
You better be damn sure you are legally in the right. Otherwise, keep your gun at home. Somebody breaks into my home in the middle of the night is dead, no questions asked or required by Oklahoma law. Home invasion falls into the same catagory. Your home is your castle, you may defend the inside of it with lethal force at any time.
Click to expand...

Not in every state.

The "Castle Doctrine" is law in most states -- including OK.

cd.jpg
 
The NRA also offers insurance on guns and the nice thing is that you only have to list make and model. Many of the other policies insist on serial numbers as well. I'd rather not give that information out personally.
 
Dr. O said:
NWP, that's a might fine set of wall hangings there...
Can you imagine the headlines if the police were to bust into your apartment by mistake?
denny-o
Click to expand...

Not gonna happen... I live in a house!!! they come busting in here with out a warrant the headline would read multiple officers found dead.
 
The ones who think they are going to be great heroes seldom are. A true hero is usually very surprised that others would think of him in such a manner.

John
 
gprellwitz said:
Truly not trying to diss anyone here, but how do you protect those collections when you're not home? I know there are a lot of gun safes out there. Why did you opt not to go with one (or more) of those? Do you have them on a motion sensor with high explosives?
Click to expand...


Is not your home a "container"? Now we have to have a container within a container?

Good sturdy doors, locking windows, an alarm system, and the guns not being "in plain view" (though my television, computers, and other desirable items are) can be just as good as a gun safe.
 
hmmm, who's 50th out of 50? I wanna live there!!!
 
Many years ago, when I shared a house with more than a few, like minded party animals, I had a small collection of assorted rifles and one shotgun displayed on the wall of my room. One of the guys moved out and headed east home, my collection left with him.

Out of all of them, the only ones I still miss today are a British swamp and jungle military carbine, that I jumped with at Fort Campbell one time, and a Winchester lever action carbine that had a very low number serial number, just four digits. I never bothered to collect rifles again.

John
 
Here's my latest project, a Form1 SBS Saiga 12. 12.5". Shoots great from both 10 and 20rd magazines. The ultimate beer can slayer :)

saiga12-sbs.jpg
 
jesse said:
Eventually -- but it is hard to justify a several thousand dollar safe when homeowners insurance would cover the loss. (Not that some of them are easily replaced with $).
Click to expand...

It's not the loss and $$$ that are a concern, it's the carnage the stolen weapons can cause after they leave your hands. Ownership of weapons comes with the responsibility of securing the general public from unwanted effects.
 
tdager said:
Is not your home a "container"? Now we have to have a container within a container?

Good sturdy doors, locking windows, an alarm system, and the guns not being "in plain view" (though my television, computers, and other desirable items are) can be just as good as a gun safe.
Click to expand...

No, not really, and be careful... if the guns are linked in any way to you (even through the police report filed upon their theft so you can collect on the insurance) and you didn't have them locked up as a jury would see as prudent (gun safe, trigger locks....) you may carry liability for any injuries or deaths produced by those weapons. Unsecured weapons are a definite liability. You won't most likely go to jail for a death in most states, but you can certainly get sued for it.
 
Henning said:
No, not really, and be careful... if the guns are linked in any way to you (even through the police report filed upon their theft so you can collect on the insurance) and you didn't have them locked up as a jury would see as prudent (gun safe, trigger locks....) you may carry liability for any injuries or deaths produced by those weapons. Unsecured weapons are a definite liability. You won't most likely go to jail for a death in most states, but you can certainly get sued for it.
Click to expand...

Not in every state - some states -- at the urging of the NRA -- have passed laws recently protecting owners against such contributory negligence claims.

Here's a good article form a law review from a Gun control advocate's point of view: http://www.saf.org/journal/14/Lock,StockandBarrel.pdf

These few lines made it worth the read:

I addressed a group of high school students at the Arkansas State Capitol. I was young and naive in those days. I thought I could mold their young minds. I believed that if I argued with enough passion and logic, I could convince them that gun control was a necessary solution to gun violence.

And it seemed to be working. Their attention was rapt. You could hear a pin drop. They‘re with me, I thought. I‘m winning them over. When I finished, the first person to raise her hand was a demure-looking 15–year–old girl. She said, "Professor, what‘s the most important thing in the world to you? I said, "My daughter, why?" She said, "Mine‘s a pearl-handled revolver that my grandmother gave me, and if you ever tried to take it away, I‘d shoot you right between the eyes."
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:
 
Nice quote, Dan. :)

I'm with Henning on this, though - if you own firearms, you do have a responsibility to keep them at least somewhat secured. Keeping the shotgun under your bed at night is fine, just put it in the safe (even if it's a crappy one) when you leave for work in the morning.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Nice quote, Dan. :)

I'm with Henning on this, though - if you own firearms, you do have a responsibility to keep them at least somewhat secured. Keeping the shotgun under your bed at night is fine, just put it in the safe (even if it's a crappy one) when you leave for work in the morning.
Click to expand...

I'd say it's something that really depends on the demographics of where you live - both in terms of the actual standard of care you should follow, and in terms of potential jurors.

For instance, I live in a fairly rural area - practically always have. I'm comfortable saying that most people around here don't bother with gun safes or trigger locks, and instead keep their gats in the proverbial closet/nightstand/under the bed. Additionally, there's not a terribly high rate of home burglaries here. So, that means the actual risk of someone stealing an unlocked gun is low, and the standard of care is correspondengly that you wouldn't be deemed negligent for not keeping a gun under lock. And, to top it off, any jury would likely be composed of people whose thoughts/experiences would be similar.

But, change that to, I don't know, Boston. Higher crime rate, burglaries far more common, and an entirely different group of people who would be on a jury - people who would possibly not own guns, not be experienced with them, etc., meaning they'd be more likely to say that you were negligent for not locking your guns up in the face of a credible risk (burglary).
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
I'd say it's something that really depends on the demographics of where you live - both in terms of the actual standard of care you should follow, and in terms of potential jurors.

For instance, I live in a fairly rural area - practically always have. I'm comfortable saying that most people around here don't bother with gun safes or trigger locks, and instead keep their gats in the proverbial closet/nightstand/under the bed. Additionally, there's not a terribly high rate of home burglaries here. So, that means the actual risk of someone stealing an unlocked gun is low, and the standard of care is correspondengly that you wouldn't be deemed negligent for not keeping a gun under lock. And, to top it off, any jury would likely be composed of people whose thoughts/experiences would be similar.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Any firearms owner may be found negligent in a civil trial if he/she failed to act in a "reasonable manner"

Every jurisdiction will have different interpretation of what is reasonable, and this is as it should be! Some areas have high gun ownership rates -- people know what is "common practice" in their area, and those who act outside those bounds are at risk.

In Western Pennsylvania, for example, I could not find a single civil case award for negligence where firearms were stolen from a home.

The Trial attorney would also have to prove the owner evidenced Breach of Duty, and that the Breach of the Duty is the Proximate cause of the Plaintiff's injuries (and there are quantifiable damages).

Such a case would be the same if some kid broke into a hangar or even an airplane on the ramp and took it for a joy ride and then crashed. The liability suit would try to prove that the owner of that airplane had not taken reasonable precautions to prevent such an occurrence.

IMHO, trigger locks defeat the purpose of a defensive firearm -- ready access when needed. Sure, some folks are anal enough to unlock each trigger each time they return home and then lock before leaving.

Most people are not that anal, and thus such action is an unreasonable burden.
 
If you have kids, they make bedside, quick access gunsafes. As I have no kids, the .45 sits on the nightstand. When I leave it either goes with me or goes into the safe.
 
Anthony said:
If you have kids, they make bedside, quick access gunsafes. As I have no kids, the .45 sits on the nightstand. When I leave it either goes with me or goes into the safe.
Click to expand...

Our three kids grew up with firearms. Each learned to shoot a .22. early, and each knew what a firearm could do. The bloom was off the rose.

Sure, other kids came over -- and our kids knew which areas of the house were off limits.

My son played soldiers in the backyard with his friends, but even young he knew not to confuse play with reality.

Lock the guns away and they become a irresistible muse to some kids. Teach them what they are and how they work and they learn to respect and it becomes a non-issue.
 
dmccormack said:
Agreed.

Any firearms owner may be found negligent in a civil trial if he/she failed to act in a "reasonable manner"

Every jurisdiction will have different interpretation of what is reasonable, and this is as it should be! Some areas have high gun ownership rates -- people know what is "common practice" in their area, and those who act outside those bounds are at risk.

In Western Pennsylvania, for example, I could not find a single civil case award for negligence where firearms were stolen from a home.

The Trial attorney would also have to prove the owner evidenced Breach of Duty, and that the Breach of the Duty is the Proximate cause of the Plaintiff's injuries (and there are quantifiable damages).

Such a case would be the same if some kid broke into a hangar or even an airplane on the ramp and took it for a joy ride and then crashed. The liability suit would try to prove that the owner of that airplane had not taken reasonable precautions to prevent such an occurrence.

IMHO, trigger locks defeat the purpose of a defensive firearm -- ready access when needed. Sure, some folks are anal enough to unlock each trigger each time they return home and then lock before leaving.

Most people are not that anal, and thus such action is an unreasonable burden.
Click to expand...

That's about the size of it. The key (and this is true for pretty much everything) is simply to act "reasonably." Obviously, that's a term that can't be specifically defined, but we all kind of know what it involves.
 
dmccormack said:
Our three kids grew up with firearms. Each learned to shoot a .22. early, and each knew what a firearm could do. The bloom was off the rose.

Sure, other kids came over -- and our kids knew which areas of the house were off limits.

My son played soldiers in the backyard with his friends, but even young he knew not to confuse play with reality.

Lock the guns away and they become a irresistible muse to some kids. Teach them what they are and how they work and they learn to respect and it becomes a non-issue.
Click to expand...

What's puzzled me is that I grew up the exact same way - knew exactly where everything was. But, and I mean this quite literally, it never even occurred to me to even touch one of the guns in the house (exception was the BB guns) without my dad's express asked permission. The most I ever did was to take the manual for a pistol and read it, because at the time (I think I was 13-ish), I didn't know how semi-automatic pistols came apart and wanted to see if it explained it.

We all hear these horror stories about the kids taking the dad's gun to school, to show friends, etc. But, that never even occurred to me to do. I'd love to know how/why that happened...and hope that I'm capable of repeating it.
 
I would have to admit I did take my father's muzzle loading Derringer to school once. I was well versed how to use firearms and I knew I would be in deep trouble if my father learned I had done so. I only showed it to a few friends and I didn't have a cap, powder or ball with me.

On the other hand it was only a few years ago that one of our local schools eliminated their annual bring your rifle to school day.

Brian
 
brcase said:
I would have to admit I did take my father's muzzle loading Derringer to school once. I was well versed how to use firearms and I knew I would be in deep trouble if my father learned I had done so. I only showed it to a few friends and I didn't have a cap, powder or ball with me.

On the other hand it was only a few years ago that one of our local schools eliminated their annual bring your rifle to school day.

Brian
Click to expand...

If there was a regular poker game in the cafeteria at lunch, I think you could argue justification to a judge. :)

Besides, if you watch The Simpsons at all, you know that derringer bullets just bounce off of everything. :)
 
Lock the guns away and they become a irresistible muse to some kids. Teach them what they are and how they work and they learn to respect and it becomes a non-issue.
Click to expand...


I think there is truth in that, however, I am more worried about the kid's friends exploring than if they were my own. I don't have children, but if I did I'd train them but still keep the guns locked up as I wouldn't trust their friends to stay in the "designated" areas.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
If there was a regular poker game in the cafeteria at lunch, I think you could argue justification to a judge. :)

Besides, if you watch The Simpsons at all, you know that derringer bullets just bounce off of everything. :)
Click to expand...


Back then it would have just been visit to the principals office and maybe a call to my parents. The principal was my cousin.

I don't watch the Simpsons but I do know the Derringer bullets do bounce off anything, It was a replica of the one that killed President Lincoln. He must have been hit over the head with it because he certianly couldn't have died from a gunshot wound from it :).

My father was sighting in his replica Kentucky Rifle on the 100 yard range, While he was doing so I was loading the Derringer and shooting at his 100 yard target. After a couple shots we noticed that the bullet was bouncing off the ground at about the 50 yard mark.

Brian
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
What's puzzled me is that I grew up the exact same way - knew exactly where everything was. But, and I mean this quite literally, it never even occurred to me to even touch one of the guns in the house (exception was the BB guns) without my dad's express asked permission. The most I ever did was to take the manual for a pistol and read it, because at the time (I think I was 13-ish), I didn't know how semi-automatic pistols came apart and wanted to see if it explained it.

We all hear these horror stories about the kids taking the dad's gun to school, to show friends, etc. But, that never even occurred to me to do. I'd love to know how/why that happened...and hope that I'm capable of repeating it.
Click to expand...

I think it's training and child rearing that goes way beyond guns.
 
Anthony said:
I think there is truth in that, however, I am more worried about the kid's friends exploring than if they were my own. I don't have children, but if I did I'd train them but still keep the guns locked up as I wouldn't trust their friends to stay in the "designated" areas.
Click to expand...

Well, our kids would tell little Joey, "We're not allowed in there..."

If Joey persisted, the next thing he heard was "MOM!"

Our kids were never unattended at home.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
I agree - I just wish I knew what was involved. :)
Click to expand...

Pretty simple, really.

Before kids can understand or comprehend everything, they have to be convinced you (parent) do, so they trust you when you say, "Don't touch this!"

The earlier it starts, the less painful the lessons.

When the light breaks inside the kids head, and he/she sees the rules you made were all about protecting them, they'll respect you.

If they figure out it was all about your selfish interests, they'll despise you.

Stuff like that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top