What's Your Opinion? Firearms or Not?

[zardinuk]

Alright, you may be retired law enforcement, but you are so far off base I can't buy any of this. So post a reference to this "400%" study so I can pick it apart piece by piece.

If you fire a 12 gauge shotgun at someone, no matter where you hit them they go down instantly, I'm sure. Handguns, maybe not... depends, but I think handgun operators are generally better trained. A shotgun removes or otherwise annihilates limbs, and a hit anywhere to your body will certainly cause massive trauma.

I grew up in east Long Beach, CA during the 80s and ALL of the local convenience stores, AM/PM, 7-eleven, Eddie's Liquor, were armed, and you heard about them warding off robbers regularly. An Eddie's Liquor clerk was shot and killed once. I remember one day the AM/PM clerk told us there was a robbery the day before, a man with a knife and on PCP was coming around the counter and the clerk had a gun aimed on him. After repeated threats the knife wielding criminal finally turned around and went back to his car. The clerk shot out all the tires and the police arrived and tasered the man. After looking at the video tape, the police told the clerk that when the man began to come around the counter, he should have shot and killed him, and they turned a blind eye to his illegal shooting out of the tires.

So I don't know where you grew up, what inner city you're talking about... I'm sure others in east Long Beach can relate to me. These convenience store owners are almost all armed, and when I moved all of them had bulletproof glass. I don't get my impressions from movies or TV, and frankly I think your obsession with violent entertainment is irrational. There aren't a whole lot of movies that deal with inner city life.

And to call gun collector cops "bad cops" is truly absurd. It just highlights your ignorance. I grew up with a friend who's dad was a forest ranger, kept a civilian M-4 under his bed for home defense, great guy took us camping all the time.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by waterworldly

. . . did you know that if a person is amped and runs at you with a knife, they will get to you even if you are shooting away, if they are within 50 feet of you when the first bullets fly?

Sir, if only all police were as rational as you. I'm sure you have seen things that have made you more "worldly" than you would like, but I suppose it just goes with the territory when a person chooses a career in law enforcement.

To your point regarding trying to stop someone attacking with a knife, I would like to relate a story told to me by one of my best friends, a 30 year member of the Denver Police Department who will be retiring this Friday (9/14/'07).

When he was fairly new to the Denver PD, he and his partner responded to a call in a very unsavory section of the city. A domestic disturbance had escalated, and one of the combatants had armed himself with a butcher knife, threatening to kill anybody and everybody.

They arrived to find him backed into a corner of the kitchen, wielding the knife and daring them to shoot him. Now this man was huge, very muscular and amped up on fear and adrenaline (and possibly more), and neither cop wanted to tangle with him.

Of course they both had their guns trained on the guy, but they knew exactly what you related, waterworldly, that bullets probably couldn't stop him before he got to at least one of them. So they tried to calm him down and get him to drop the knife.

He wasn't afraid of the cops, their guns, getting shot - probably wasn't even afraid to die. That made him that much more dangerous. And all their attempts to reason with him only seemed to make him more irate.

When it looked like he was getting ready to charge, my friend's partner lowered his gun a little bit. He was no longer aiming at the man's throat or heart - but at his crotch.

When the guy saw this, he let loose with a tirade of cursing, calling the cops "p***ies," and saying only a "m-f'in coward" would shoot a man's "***k" (unit) off, then dropped the knife, turned around, and put his hands behind him waiting to be handcuffed.

To me, this only proves, once again, that being smart is more powerful than being tough. Being both makes one most formidable.

TaoJones

[Pura Vida]

Wouldn't it just be easier to not cruise east Long Beach? Especially if the police are willing to overlook a firearm related crime. Really that is the whole argument, isn't it? If you want to wag around a gun go ahead, but the world really isn't that dangerous. Sure it might make sense in Somalia but who wants sail Somalia?

This is a rip off, I'll admit, of PJ O'Rourke. But I have just two words for anyone who thinks it is easy to hit something with a shot gun: "Sporting Clays".

pv

"I have two words for anyone for anyone missing the good old days, modern dentistry." P.J. O'Rourke "All The Troubles in the World".

[zardinuk]

Tao, all that tells me (and a point more relevant to this discussion) is that the guns the cops were holding in that situation turned the tables. If they had no guns, and the guy was armed with a knife, he would have been empowered and probably would have made an attempt to get away, the cops may have tried to stop him and would have likely been stabbed. The guns were the determining factor there, not necessarily that they pointed them at his junk. The crotch move will have a pretty random outcome, if you ask me. Another knife guy might have been thought the cops weren't taking him seriously at that point. A taser is a much more reliable method of disarming someone like that.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Pura Vida

This is a rip off, I'll admit, of PJ O'Rourke. But I have just two words for anyone who thinks it is easy to hit something with a shot gun: "Sporting Clays".

pv

"I have two words for anyone for anyone missing the good old days, modern dentistry." P.J. O'Rourke "All The Troubles in the World".

I always knew I'd like you, pv, but as I learn that you not only read Lao Tzu and Matthieu Ricard, but P.J. O'Rourke as well, my esteem only increases.

TaoJones

[libellula]

flare gun is the best solution for international sailing

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by libellula

flare gun is the best solution for international sailing

Damn!! And here I am building a boat!

[waterworldly]

"If you want to wag around a gun go ahead, but the world really isn't that dangerous. Sure it might make sense in Somalia but who wants sail Somalia?"

Thank you Pura Vida, my point exactly. If I wanted to be a cowboy I would have stayed in the Bronx. I suppose the beach scene in California isn't like the movies either, but then again, what do I know. It is what it is.

[hellosailor]

"The 400% figure is accurate "
Ahuh. Then of course, you'll be able to cite a source for that figure, and generous enough to do so.

"Line up, march into the boxcars, don't worry about your bags they will be on the next train." Yes indeed, appeasement works very well.

[Pura Vida]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

""Line up, march into the boxcars, don't worry about your bags they will be on the next train." Yes indeed, appeasement works very well.

You gotta do better than that...

[muskoka]

Waterworldy,

Thanks for that level of experience you've put forth.

Two things really strike me as important. Firstly, a lot of folks talking about defending themselves haven't really travelled much. Not to be naive, but the world is generally populated by people who have more interest in trading with you than hurting you. I've spent 12+ years travelling through Asia - all the cities & all dense 3rd world urban environments where you'd expect trouble. And it's a rare situation.

Secondly, I honestly think common sense is far more valuable than a gun. If you really think a place to be that dangerous - avoid it.

Why oh why, would you want to cruise in an environment where you think it necessary to use lethal force?

If you want safety, why not cruise Canada or the Med?

Originally Posted by zardinuk

Tao, all that tells me (and a point more relevant to this discussion) is that the guns the cops were holding in that situation turned the tables. If they had no guns, and the guy was armed with a knife, he would have been empowered and probably would have made an attempt to get away, the cops may have tried to stop him and would have likely been stabbed. The guns were the determining factor there, not necessarily that they pointed them at his junk. The crotch move will have a pretty random outcome, if you ask me. Another knife guy might have been thought the cops weren't taking him seriously at that point. A taser is a much more reliable method of disarming someone like that.

British bobbies do it all the time. They, armed with sticks basically, manage to uphold the law.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by muskoka

Why oh why, would you want to cruise in an environment where you think it necessary to use lethal force?

If you want safety, why not cruise Canada or the Med?

muskoka, I had intended to respond to your post as it originally appeared, but it seems you've edited out the part I wanted to respond to.

Still, if someone were to think they should stay out of this discussion because they might think it's an American argument, I would point out that the world has shrunk considerably in the last couple of centuries, and most serious disagreements now have global dimensions. Therefore, gun-toting cruisers are as much the rest of the world's concern as they are mine, any other American, or any other unarmed cruiser.

Your point, evident in your quote above, deserves a response, too, I think. While common sense might suggest that fearful cruisers should just avoid those areas they perceive as dangerous, I don't believe that will solve the problem. Fearful people take their fear with them wherever they travel, even if it's just down the street.

Only they, and perhaps their therapist(s), can ever know the basis of their fears. Until they pin down the cause(s) of their anxiety, they will never feel secure. Until they feel secure, they will continue to see danger in even the most innocuous circumstances, even if they never venture outside US waters.

TaoJones

[hellosailor]

Muskoka, the Bobbies don't talk about it much--but they have long had Special Weapons squads, who are dispatched with firearms.

Police in the US once were armed with nightsticks, just like the Bobbies (who were the role model) but even when trained, they found out that sticks don't provide much protection against Really Bad Men. Which brings us to Prohibition in the 30's in the US, and the way the ban on the illegal drug "alcohol" led to gangsters adopting powerful guns and all. Gee, lookit that, shades of Coke Wars today, proof that the US Government is incapable of remembering a mere 50 years of history and the collateral effects of "Drug bans".

Pura Vida-
What, I should have said "Neville Chamberlain" ? He was just one rube, the train loaders conned millions of the poor schmucks. Excuse me, "Law Abiding Citizens and Burghers."

I'm just so naive. If someone is kind enough to promise to kill me, I take them at their word. And, oops, might do something to prevent my death, with total and callous disregard for the folks who made the promise. Should I ask them "Scouts' honor?" before I believe the threat?

[Pura Vida]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Pura Vida-
What, I should have said "Neville Chamberlain" ? He was just one rube, the train loaders conned millions of the poor schmucks. Excuse me, "Law Abiding Citizens and Burghers."

I'm just so naive. If someone is kind enough to promise to kill me, I take them at their word. And, oops, might do something to prevent my death, with total and callous disregard for the folks who made the promise. Should I ask them "Scouts' honor?" before I believe the threat?

That's OK HS,
I'm just trying to draw this to the point I made earlier about extreme examples and lobby talking points (for either side).

Suggesting that keeping a gun on a cruising yacht (the topic) has a parallel in Nazi Germany screams of the old usenet rule, Godwin's Law. This has dwindled into the same 'stuffing' that is repeated on forums all over the web, even the religious forums. I would just like to see someone come up with something usefull and relevant to help a sailor to think this out for himself. Unfortunately the thread has become so long that a legitimate search for reasonable arguments is unlikely.

Sorry, I'm off my soapbox now. I'll just try to ignore the thread from now on.

pv

[44'cruisingcat]

To sum up what I see as salient in this thread:

If you carry a gun on board in a foreign country you will almost certainly be breaking the law - which will make you a criminal, just like those you would like to think you could defend yourself against.

By threatening deadly force you greatly increase the probability that it will be used against you.

By having a gun on board you create the possibility of someone being shot, either by accident or mistake. Both are far more likely than you being killed or even robbed by pirates.

The fact that you have a gun on board is not going to act as a deterrent to anybody, because you will have to keep that fact secret to avoid being thrown in jail. So the chance that someone will try to rob you is no less than the chance they will try to rob an unarmed boat. However the probability of it resulting in someone being shot is far greater.


To sum up my conclusions drawn from this thread:

If I see a US flagged boat in an anchorage I will anchor as far away from it as possible. Preferably out of range of gunfire.

If I see a US flagged boat dragging it's anchor at night I will mind my own business. I have no intention of getting shot while trying to save someone from their own poor anchoring technique.