What's your opinion of gun control?

[craked5]

I don't think that can be discussed about the use of weapons against migrants. Only when they commit crimes. The weapon is almost every citizen of Switzerland because they are all reservists in case of war are bound to come to the Assembly point.

Why not? Guns are for hunting. But they are also for protection.

With the low birth rate in Switzerland, soon most of the people will be foreigners. They will want to take guns away from the Swiss people who remain. There will be too many of them for the Swiss people to fight, even with the guns.

That is what gun control is all about... taking the guns away. Usually governments do it to their citizens. In the case of Switzerland, it will be the foreigners. Some Swiss will fight, but they will lose.

Protection means aggression.

Migrants aren't aggressing you. They're fleeing the war you started that's all.
Technically they're the one in need of protection... From you --'

Migrants fleeing from war, and would have to defend their country. I have no respect. They are traitors. Why should they even allowed into the country? Unless we have given permission to the government to risk the country's economy for the sake of the cowards?

xD
They're traitors!
I mean why don't they fight our bombers and our soldiers? Hmm?
Yeah we attacked them without any reason but they should still fight with their ak47 against our tanks!
Weaklings

[1714934854]

1714934854

[1714934854]

1714934854

[craked5]

Migrants fleeing from war, and would have to defend their country. I have no respect. They are traitors. Why should they even allowed into the country? Unless we have given permission to the government to risk the country's economy for the sake of the cowards?

100% agreed. Look at the so called "rapefugees" in Germany. Somewhere around 80% and 90% of them are adult males. IMO, Germany should have given preference to the women and children.

Already done. It's just that Germany decided to also welcome men. But women and children have the first resource allocations.

It's not 90% males more 75%

And you've got a rather SIMPLE explanation if you take 12 seconds to think... Coming to Europe costs all they have for 1 ticket. Families split up, the family goes in the countryside and the yougest and strongest male goes to Europe to find a job and money to bring back the family.
You jsut have to ask any lonely male migrant and they answer you the same thing.
"why didn't you bring your family?"
"we didn't have the money, only one could go"
"why you?"
"because I can work, I can work to bring family back"

[Okurkabinladin]

Migrants fleeing from war, and would have to defend their country. I have no respect. They are traitors. Why should they even allowed into the country? Unless we have given permission to the government to risk the country's economy for the sake of the cowards?

100% agreed. Look at the so called "rapefugees" in Germany. Somewhere around 80% and 90% of them are adult males. IMO, Germany should have given preference to the women and children.

Already done. It's just that Germany decided to also welcome men. But women and children have the first resource allocations.

It's not 90% males more 75%

And you've got a rather SIMPLE explanation if you take 12 seconds to think... Coming to Europe costs all they have for 1 ticket. Families split up, the family goes in the countryside and the yougest and strongest male goes to Europe to find a job and money to bring back the family.
You jsut have to ask any lonely male migrant and they answer you the same thing.
"why didn't you bring your family?"
"we didn't have the money, only one could go"
"why you?"
"because I can work, I can work to bring family back"

You are just as biased as the poster before you.

And let me show you. Vast majority of the so called refugees dont even come from countries that are at war. Syrians make less than third of them, even though you can buy syrian passport on marketplace in places like Istanbul or Athens for 20 euro. Home countries like Nigeria, Afghanistan and Morocco refuse to take these "youths" back and they know why. Problematic young men are taken care off by well to do foreigners. For the young men it is investition.

Yes, getting to Europe is expensive, sure. Wouldnt you move to place where you would be guaranteed decent living without having to worry about finding a job? For years? Of the one million people Germany welcomed in 2015, only 40 thousand are employed. Despite government and NGO subsidies. Spit in your welcoming face.

It is not fleeing. It is an investion for asylum seekers. And business for NGOs.

I am not even going into the fact, that women and children of asylum seekers are debased and sometimes raped by other male refugees on daily basis. In refugees camps in Europe. Under supervision of government officials and NGO activists. It is ugly, but ultimately logical side effect of this giant human trafficking scheme.

[bohr]

My position is simple people have the right of self defense so they must be allowed to have weapons but if a persons has mental problems or has been on jail for violent crimes then that right must be taken away from them the same way your right of freedom is taken away when you violate the law.

[GreenBits]

My position is simple people have the right of self defense so they must be allowed to have weapons but if a persons has mental problems or has been on jail for violent crimes then that right must be taken away from them the same way your right of freedom is taken away when you violate the law.

First off, I am all for guns. I believe strongly in hunting and defence of home.
But I dont agree with taking someone's right to bear arms simply because they have committed a crime; but if they have committed a violent crime (esp on with a gun), that's a different thing. With that being said, we shouldn't be able to get assault rifles as citizens. Long guns and pistols are fine. All you should need to defend yourself if everyone else only has the same. Military hardware is just that, for the military. You should need special training, but, with that being said, you are subject to enhanced ATF investigation when you apply to receive a weapon of this sort (complete background check).

But that doesn't seem to be enough, so far 

[Sithara007]

My position is simple people have the right of self defense so they must be allowed to have weapons but if a persons has mental problems or has been on jail for violent crimes then that right must be taken away from them the same way your right of freedom is taken away when you violate the law.

You are absolutely right. People with mental diseases such as schizophrenia must not be allowed to own weapons. The same with the felons as well. If they don't have the right to vote, then why they should have the right to own guns?

[BADecker]

My position is simple people have the right of self defense so they must be allowed to have weapons but if a persons has mental problems or has been on jail for violent crimes then that right must be taken away from them the same way your right of freedom is taken away when you violate the law.

You are absolutely right. People with mental diseases such as schizophrenia must not be allowed to own weapons. The same with the felons as well. If they don't have the right to vote, then why they should have the right to own guns?

How do you tell if someone has a mental disease? Someone accuses him. Then a bunch of people jump him and haul him off to a professional for evaluation.

The 2nd Amendment says:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Did you notice the "not be infringed" part? Yet, we have all sorts of infringement all over the place, in most of the States. So, if the professionals can get away with infringement, what is to keep them from getting away with declaring that we all have a mental disease, and none of us should have guns? What this means is that the professionals and Government are the ones with the mental disease right now, because they are trying to make us fearful so we give up our guns voluntarily.

The answer is, require all the people to open carry. Nobody wants to die, or even be harmed. And the requirement to open carry when off your own residence will make the only protection that will work... self-protection. Even the mentally ill will understand, and respect the gun in the hands of their potential victim.

[tvbcof]

I just got a 9mm which is a caliber I've not had any experience with.  Actually I got it for someone else, but might buy them a different one and trade them.  It is a Taurus 709 slim which is sort of targeted at the concealed carry crowd.  I'm mostly familiar with my 357 mag.  The 9mm is quite manageable by comparison.  Even with the relatively small automatic I feel that I could put a number of bullets into someone breaking through a door in under a second.

For home defense purposes I would suggest a more full sized automatic mostly because it holds more rounds.  Might be even easier to rack and fire also.  Not sure since I've not played around with one.  The one I got was sort of a spur-of-the-moment purchase for a family member since there have been troubles with tweekers in my area of late.

In contemplating tactics recently and watching some of the home invasion footage on youtube, I would suggest that the most important thing a person can do is to have a well thought out and well rehearsed plan about where in the house to retreat to. and how to mount an attack or defense from there.  Practice it a bunch so it is Pavlovian should one's window breaking be what wakes a person up.

I would also suggest to analyze various available footage paying attention to the behavior of the home invaders and put yourself into their minds remembering that in the common case they will be learning the layout of the house as they go.  It is interesting to note how common it is for home invaders to work in groups of three.

Not sure if it's been posted on this board or not, but here is a rather delightful bit of footage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stOcTAADa38

Shows how useless 911 can be and it is awfully amusing when the woman loses patience and hangs up on 911 to call her husband in order to get some actual help.  Apparently Asian restaurant owners are specifically targeted because they close late and often take the night's earnings home.  Interestingly and not surprisingly the strong consensus is that this woman should be granted instant U.S. citizenship if she wants it.

[Sithara007]

My position is simple people have the right of self defense so they must be allowed to have weapons but if a persons has mental problems or has been on jail for violent crimes then that right must be taken away from them the same way your right of freedom is taken away when you violate the law.

You are absolutely right. People with mental diseases such as schizophrenia must not be allowed to own weapons. The same with the felons as well. If they don't have the right to vote, then why they should have the right to own guns?

How do you tell if someone has a mental disease? Someone accuses him. Then a bunch of people jump him and haul him off to a professional for evaluation.

Perhaps it should be made mandatory to get a certificate from a qualified psychiatrist before someone can own a gun. Or at least, the cops can bar anyone who has undergone prior treatment for mental disease from owning the firearms.

[Holliday]

I just got a 9mm which is a caliber I've not had any experience with.  Actually I got it for someone else, but might buy them a different one and trade them.  It is a Taurus 709 slim which is sort of targeted at the concealed carry crowd.  I'm mostly familiar with my 357 mag.  The 9mm is quite manageable by comparison.  Even with the relatively small automatic I feel that I could put a number of bullets into someone breaking through a door in under a second.

For home defense purposes I would suggest a more full sized automatic mostly because it holds more rounds.  Might be even easier to rack and fire also.  Not sure since I've not played around with one.  The one I got was sort of a spur-of-the-moment purchase for a family member since there have been troubles with tweekers in my area of late.

In contemplating tactics recently and watching some of the home invasion footage on youtube, I would suggest that the most important thing a person can do is to have a well thought out and well rehearsed plan about where in the house to retreat to. and how to mount an attack or defense from there.  Practice it a bunch so it is Pavlovian should one's window breaking be what wakes a person up.

I would also suggest to analyze various available footage paying attention to the behavior of the home invaders and put yourself into their minds remembering that in the common case they will be learning the layout of the house as they go.  It is interesting to note how common it is for home invaders to work in groups of three.

Not sure if it's been posted on this board or not, but here is a rather delightful bit of footage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stOcTAADa38

Shows how useless 911 can be and it is awfully amusing when the woman loses patience and hangs up on 911 to call her husband in order to get some actual help.  Apparently Asian restaurant owners are specifically targeted because they close late and often take the night's earnings home.  Interestingly and not surprisingly the strong consensus is that this woman should be granted instant U.S. citizenship if she wants it.

I was going to write a long post but I'll keep it short and sweet (also, everything here is just my opinion, not the only opinion). I've done a lot of research on calibers and firearms over the past oh... too many years. I own one pistol caliber: 9mm. I own several handguns, all the same brand (Glock), which I've come to know like the back of my hand.

A pistol is only for when you can't carry a rifle. What I mean to say is that for home defense, where your options are wide open, a pistol should only be considered backup. My preferred choice is a Remington 870 Police Magnum 12 gauge with extended magazine and low recoil personal defense shells. No fancy add-ons.



In action (it's a marine magnum, same thing - nickle plated for extreme conditions). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2fb1VIiRYg

If you plan to use any weapon for self-defense, consider professional training! It's really unbelievable how much you can learn. I've been around firearms all my life, and I'm still learning.

[tvbcof]

I just got a 9mm which is a caliber I've not had any experience with.  Actually I got it for someone else, but might buy them a different one and trade them.  It is a Taurus 709 slim which is sort of targeted at the concealed carry crowd.  I'm mostly familiar with my 357 mag.  The 9mm is quite manageable by comparison.  Even with the relatively small automatic I feel that I could put a number of bullets into someone breaking through a door in under a second.

...

I was going to write a long post but I'll keep it short and sweet (also, everything here is just my opinion, not the only opinion). I've done a lot of research on calibers and firearms over the past oh... too many years. I own one pistol caliber: 9mm. I own several handguns, all the same brand (Glock), which I've come to know like the back of my hand.

A pistol is only for when you can't carry a rifle. What I mean to say is that for home defense, where your options are wide open, a pistol should only be considered backup. My preferred choice is a Remington 870 Police Magnum 12 gauge with extended magazine and low recoil personal defense shells. No fancy add-ons.



In action (it's a marine magnum, same thing - nickle plated for extreme conditions). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2fb1VIiRYg

If you plan to use any weapon for self-defense, consider professional training! It's really unbelievable how much you can learn. I've been around firearms all my life, and I'm still learning.

I think we've had this discussion before, but it was a while back.  I personally prefer a shotgun for home defense (and investigating issues on my property be they human, sub-human, or animal), but one can have both.

In this case, it was a struggle to get the family member to have anything at all.  The anti-gun propaganda strongly effects a lot of people.  A small firearm is a good first step and I hope that once the shame and guilt of being a gun owner subsides there will be upgrades in the mix.  Additionally, the people who need guns the most tend to be those who are the least physically capable of dealing with their operation because the scumbags who are a threat target them specifically.

The primary load I choose for my shotgun(s) are 00-buck and slugs.  This in case I need to defend against bears or engine blocks.  I personally don't have much of an issue with the recoil but everyone is built differently.

Camera technology is increasing rapidly.  I just put some effort into hooking everything into zoneminder.  There is a fair chance that by the time an attacker and I meet I will have been watching them for 15 minutes or so and will have selected the proper mix of weapons, but this is due to the layout of my property as much as anything.

[Holliday]

I think we've had this discussion before, but it was a while back.  I personally prefer a shotgun for home defense (and investigating issues on my property be they human, sub-human, or animal), but one can have both.

In this case, it was a struggle to get the family member to have anything at all.  The anti-gun propaganda strongly effects a lot of people.  A small firearm is a good first step and I hope that once the shame and guilt of being a gun owner subsides there will be upgrades in the mix.  Additionally, the people who need guns the most tend to be those who are the least physically capable of dealing with their operation because the scumbags who are a threat target them specifically.

The primary load I choose for my shotgun(s) are 00-buck and slugs.  This in case I need to defend against bears or engine blocks.  I personally don't have much of an issue with the recoil but everyone is built differently.

Camera technology is increasing rapidly.  I just put some effort into hooking everything into zoneminder.  There is a fair chance that by the time an attacker and I meet I will have been watching them for 15 minutes or so and will have selected the proper mix of weapons, but this is due to the layout of my property as much as anything.

Sounds good! You've clearly thought plenty about these things and have a firm grasp on the subject. Also, I agree, baby steps are better than no steps at all.

If we did discuss this before, I may even have completely changed direction since then! I don't remember exactly when I decided that a shotgun was the best fit for my home defense needs. I did change pistol calibers at one point in my journey.

I just wanted to add my two cents (probably more for the audience's benefit than yours).

[Barrymore]

I think we've had this discussion before, but it was a while back.  I personally prefer a shotgun for home defense (and investigating issues on my property be they human, sub-human, or animal), but one can have both.

In this case, it was a struggle to get the family member to have anything at all.  The anti-gun propaganda strongly effects a lot of people.  A small firearm is a good first step and I hope that once the shame and guilt of being a gun owner subsides there will be upgrades in the mix.  Additionally, the people who need guns the most tend to be those who are the least physically capable of dealing with their operation because the scumbags who are a threat target them specifically.

The primary load I choose for my shotgun(s) are 00-buck and slugs.  This in case I need to defend against bears or engine blocks.  I personally don't have much of an issue with the recoil but everyone is built differently.

Camera technology is increasing rapidly.  I just put some effort into hooking everything into zoneminder.  There is a fair chance that by the time an attacker and I meet I will have been watching them for 15 minutes or so and will have selected the proper mix of weapons, but this is due to the layout of my property as much as anything.

Sounds good! You've clearly thought plenty about these things and have a firm grasp on the subject. Also, I agree, baby steps are better than no steps at all.

If we did discuss this before, I may even have completely changed direction since then! I don't remember exactly when I decided that a shotgun was the best fit for my home defense needs. I did change pistol calibers at one point in my journey.

I just wanted to add my two cents (probably more for the audience's benefit than yours).

The shotgun deals great damage to health for the attacker. Besides, he is only effective at close range. It seems to me that for self defense the best fit for the gun, of course if you will train your skills in shooting.

[Spirit2016]

I think we've had this discussion before, but it was a while back.  I personally prefer a shotgun for home defense (and investigating issues on my property be they human, sub-human, or animal), but one can have both.

In this case, it was a struggle to get the family member to have anything at all.  The anti-gun propaganda strongly effects a lot of people.  A small firearm is a good first step and I hope that once the shame and guilt of being a gun owner subsides there will be upgrades in the mix.  Additionally, the people who need guns the most tend to be those who are the least physically capable of dealing with their operation because the scumbags who are a threat target them specifically.

The primary load I choose for my shotgun(s) are 00-buck and slugs.  This in case I need to defend against bears or engine blocks.  I personally don't have much of an issue with the recoil but everyone is built differently.

Camera technology is increasing rapidly.  I just put some effort into hooking everything into zoneminder.  There is a fair chance that by the time an attacker and I meet I will have been watching them for 15 minutes or so and will have selected the proper mix of weapons, but this is due to the layout of my property as much as anything.

Sounds good! You've clearly thought plenty about these things and have a firm grasp on the subject. Also, I agree, baby steps are better than no steps at all.

If we did discuss this before, I may even have completely changed direction since then! I don't remember exactly when I decided that a shotgun was the best fit for my home defense needs. I did change pistol calibers at one point in my journey.

I just wanted to add my two cents (probably more for the audience's benefit than yours).

For the protection of their property and the territory, home or something like that, really shotgun fit better the rest of the weapons. Of course this is the last degree of self-defense. More would not hurt to do surveillance. But to carry a gun on the street already does not seem normal. There are other ways to protect yourself. While it is true on the street more risk to the life, than at home.

[Marcus_2017]

I think we've had this discussion before, but it was a while back.  I personally prefer a shotgun for home defense (and investigating issues on my property be they human, sub-human, or animal), but one can have both.

In this case, it was a struggle to get the family member to have anything at all.  The anti-gun propaganda strongly effects a lot of people.  A small firearm is a good first step and I hope that once the shame and guilt of being a gun owner subsides there will be upgrades in the mix.  Additionally, the people who need guns the most tend to be those who are the least physically capable of dealing with their operation because the scumbags who are a threat target them specifically.

The primary load I choose for my shotgun(s) are 00-buck and slugs.  This in case I need to defend against bears or engine blocks.  I personally don't have much of an issue with the recoil but everyone is built differently.

Camera technology is increasing rapidly.  I just put some effort into hooking everything into zoneminder.  There is a fair chance that by the time an attacker and I meet I will have been watching them for 15 minutes or so and will have selected the proper mix of weapons, but this is due to the layout of my property as much as anything.

Sounds good! You've clearly thought plenty about these things and have a firm grasp on the subject. Also, I agree, baby steps are better than no steps at all.

If we did discuss this before, I may even have completely changed direction since then! I don't remember exactly when I decided that a shotgun was the best fit for my home defense needs. I did change pistol calibers at one point in my journey.

I just wanted to add my two cents (probably more for the audience's benefit than yours).

For the protection of their property and the territory, home or something like that, really shotgun fit better the rest of the weapons. Of course this is the last degree of self-defense. More would not hurt to do surveillance. But to carry a gun on the street already does not seem normal. There are other ways to protect yourself. While it is true on the street more risk to the life, than at home.

You ever shot a shotgun? I am sure that there. Home-defense aimed at preventing a robbery, and not the destruction of your home. Besides injuries from a shotgun causing more serious injuries and can lead to death. I don't consider the shotgun an acceptable weapon for self-defense of habitation.

[Ayiranorea]

In Western nations gun culture is common. These days it need to have strong regulations because several such incidents have taken the life of innocent people. Governments need to act fast to get better outcome. Recently an IT professional was shot dead in US.

[BADecker]

In Western nations gun culture is common. These days it need to have strong regulations because several such incidents have taken the life of innocent people. Governments need to act fast to get better outcome. Recently an IT professional was shot dead in US.

Right! And the regulation has to come from average people carrying guns, so that when something like this happens, they can get rid of the assassin on the spot.

[Holliday]

You ever shot a shotgun? I am sure that there. Home-defense aimed at preventing a robbery, and not the destruction of your home. Besides injuries from a shotgun causing more serious injuries and can lead to death. I don't consider the shotgun an acceptable weapon for self-defense of habitation.

If someone is in my home without my permission, it's my primary goal to end the threat by ending their life. The shotgun is an effective tool for this purpose.

They have clearly proven, by entering my home without my permission, that they do not acknowledge my rights, so why should I acknowledge theirs?

I'm not protecting my house. I'm protecting the people who live inside it. The people I care about. Assuming the intruder is there for a simple robbery, and not to rape and eat your children, is your first mistake. As far as I know, he won't have a flashing neon sign on his forehead that says "BURGLAR". If I employ anything less than lethal force, in some twisted consideration for the thug who has invaded my home, I am doing my family a disservice.

I'll fix the drywall later...

[Lieldoryn]

You ever shot a shotgun? I am sure that there. Home-defense aimed at preventing a robbery, and not the destruction of your home. Besides injuries from a shotgun causing more serious injuries and can lead to death. I don't consider the shotgun an acceptable weapon for self-defense of habitation.

If someone is in my home without my permission, it's my primary goal to end the threat by ending their life. The shotgun is an effective tool for this purpose.

They have clearly proven, by entering my home without my permission, that they do not acknowledge my rights, so why should I acknowledge theirs?

I'm not protecting my house. I'm protecting the people who live inside it. The people I care about. Assuming the intruder is there for a simple robbery, and not to rape and eat your children, is your first mistake. As far as I know, he won't have a flashing neon sign on his forehead that says "BURGLAR". If I employ anything less than lethal force, in some twisted consideration for the thug who has invaded my home, I am doing my family a disservice.

I'll fix the drywall later...

Don't forget that the shotgun is effective at a distance of 10 meters. With gun and then to hit the target. Will protect your property do not forget that the perp at that distance with a knife can be more effective than you with a shotgun.

[tvbcof]

You ever shot a shotgun? I am sure that there. Home-defense aimed at preventing a robbery, and not the destruction of your home. Besides injuries from a shotgun causing more serious injuries and can lead to death. I don't consider the shotgun an acceptable weapon for self-defense of habitation.

If someone is in my home without my permission, it's my primary goal to end the threat by ending their life. The shotgun is an effective tool for this purpose.

They have clearly proven, by entering my home without my permission, that they do not acknowledge my rights, so why should I acknowledge theirs?

I'm not protecting my house. I'm protecting the people who live inside it. The people I care about. Assuming the intruder is there for a simple robbery, and not to rape and eat your children, is your first mistake. As far as I know, he won't have a flashing neon sign on his forehead that says "BURGLAR". If I employ anything less than lethal force, in some twisted consideration for the thug who has invaded my home, I am doing my family a disservice.

I'll fix the drywall later...

I am fond of shotguns because of the adaptability.  The only time I've used mine in 'defense' was to discourage a bear.  I came home and startled a sow and her cub, and she climbed 15 feet up a tree very close to my deck to keep an eye on me.  I selected a rubber slug and never saw her or her cub again.  A lead slug is a whole different thing, and there is everything in between.  (BTW, a lead slug or even buckshot is quite 'effective' well beyond 10 meters.)

Shotguns can also be fairly intimidating, and in the hands of a territorial property owner they demonstrably strike fear into the soul of a criminal.  If an uninvited person invades one's property the very best outcome is if they leave on their own and don't come back.

I have a lot of respect for people who will take risk to themselves to give a potential criminal a break.  Many home invasions are stupid teens and there is at least a 50% chance that they would grow up.  OTOH, there is another 50% chance that they'll continue to cause misery for a few years until they get shot or incarcerated.  Further, a stupid but relatively harmless dead teen probably keeps 100 more from getting started in the breaking and entering habit.

A few years ago in the Portland area some guy nailed a teen who was crawling in his window with a rubber slug.  The kid self-reported to the emergency room with hairline skull fractures and a hell of a bruise.  Last year in my town some guy held three teens at gunpoint in his home and made them call the cops on themselves.  Kudo's to these merciful adults, but I would not recommend it and especially not if one has any questions about their own skill or situation awareness.  I honestly don't know what I would do, but I would hold it against no-one to _completely_ neutralize the threat.