Legal to have firearms in your house

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by japanpimp

What if someone made a special gun that was bright pink, made of plastic and shot large hard rubber bullets the size of golf balls at 300 feet per second? No enough to kill anyone but if you unloaded a bunch of those on someone they would leave your house real quick like.... would you use something like that for home protection?

---

Lmao actually yes this is a good idea
does it come in different colours

on a serious note police have tryed to use "non lethal weapons" tasers and a shotgun kind of like what you descibe

it turned out not only were they not non lethal because of the internal damage they caused but also it was more painful than just being shot

Would be nice if we had the home invasion laws the US has in Australia, here if someone breaks into your house and get hurt, they can sue you and win...

they changed it now im pretty sure you can use any force nessasary and they cannot sue you but only if you or your family is in danger

Paintball guns make for extra lulz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulstrife

Lmao actually yes this is a good idea
does it come in different colours

on a serious note police have tryed to use "non lethal weapons" tasers and a shotgun kind of like what you descibe

it turned out not only were they not non lethal because of the internal damage they caused but also it was more painful than just being shot

---

But c'mon.. anything is lethal. A baseball bat is lethal. So is a rock if you throw it and hit the person in the head. Heck, my johnson is lethal.
But we are not law enforcement. We won't use the pink gun to control mobs. We just need something for home protection that can shoot a projectile and make teh person hurt enough so they go away, fast. So yeah, non-lethal is never 100% non-lethal. But we can make something not desgned to kill that still shoots a projectile at a person to hurt them enough to make them go away, fast.
I don't know about you, but if person A beat off an offender with a baseball bat and person B shot them with my pink gun... I think the pink gun would have less chance of killing them. Because lord knows the bat might catch the offender in the head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by japanpimp

But c'mon.. anything is lethal. A baseball bat is lethal. So is a rock if you throw it and hit the person in the head. Heck, my johnson is lethal.
But we are not law enforcement. We won't use the pink gun to control mobs. We just need something for home protection that can shoot a projectile and make teh person hurt enough so they go away, fast. So yeah, non-lethal is never 100% non-lethal. But we can make something not desgned to kill that still shoots a projectile at a person to hurt them enough to make them go away, fast.
I don't know about you, but if person A beat off an offender with a baseball bat and person B shot them with my pink gun... I think the pink gun would have less chance of killing them. Because lord knows the bat might catch the offender in the head.

---

true but it takes more guts to bat someone death than it does to pull a trigger and with an armed population the robbers are always gonna need somethin bigger if everyone has a pistol then they are gonna get shotguns if everyone has shotguns they gonna get automatic weapons it ends up a never ending cycle of who can get the bigger gun

i am not against people defending themselves but guns are not the way to go in my opinion

and as much as would like to comment on your johnson i wont
(although you set yourself up for so many insults)

More people are killed by their own guns tha
others, due to accidents or... Non accidents 0_0 lol so I think it's kinda stupid to own one. There are plenty of other ways to keep your house safe.

When i saw the title i knew crip had started this thread

Largely because of how I was raised, the concept of having a firearm available for home protection is as much a no-brainer as having a fire extinguisher handy or placing lit candles in places where they won't catch the curtains on fire. I understand that those who were not raised with guns in the house won't have the same viewpoint, but when you are raised with them you see that a lot of the arguments against them are silly.

Precautions are good. They are important. Parents just automatically teach their children not to touch the stove because it is hot and can hurt them. They ensure baby can't get burned there, and as the child grows they are taught slowly, in small bits, how to manage to use the stove properly. Everyone should also do that with guns, I believe. Even if you don't have one, the child may encounter one, and wouldn't you like them to know better than to put their hands on the stove or the gun to their face? A child, properly taught, in a home where the weapons are properly secured and supervision is in place, should have no worries with regards to the gun.

Limitations are also good. Preventing those with criminal records, drug users, and the mentally unstable is all fine as far as I am concerned. But I believe that an armed citizenry is sometimes the only thing that prevents governmental tyranny. The final factor in making this decision for me is simple: I'm female, I'm short, and whether with a baseball bat or a knife or my hands, I stand little chance against a determined larger and stronger male who may wish to do harm to myself or my children. A gun evens those odds, and if this guy REALLY wants to hurt myself or my children, then a shotgun blast down the stairs should prove effective at changing his mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxyBunny

Largely because of how I was raised, the concept of having a firearm available for home protection is as much a no-brainer as having a fire extinguisher handy or placing lit candles in places where they won't catch the curtains on fire. I understand that those who were not raised with guns in the house won't have the same viewpoint, but when you are raised with them you see that a lot of the arguments against them are silly.

Precautions are good. They are important. Parents just automatically teach their children not to touch the stove because it is hot and can hurt them. They ensure baby can't get burned there, and as the child grows they are taught slowly, in small bits, how to manage to use the stove properly. Everyone should also do that with guns, I believe. Even if you don't have one, the child may encounter one, and wouldn't you like them to know better than to put their hands on the stove or the gun to their face? A child, properly taught, in a home where the weapons are properly secured and supervision is in place, should have no worries with regards to the gun.

Limitations are also good. Preventing those with criminal records, drug users, and the mentally unstable is all fine as far as I am concerned. But I believe that an armed citizenry is sometimes the only thing that prevents governmental tyranny. The final factor in making this decision for me is simple: I'm female, I'm short, and whether with a baseball bat or a knife or my hands, I stand little chance against a determined larger and stronger male who may wish to do harm to myself or my children. A gun evens those odds, and if this guy REALLY wants to hurt myself or my children, then a shotgun blast down the stairs should prove effective at changing his mind.

---

http://www.old-picture.com/american-...apshooting.jpg