2 hours ago, martin-w said:

rue Dave. But risk is always present in life. So the important factor is "probability"

Exactly. This is why I leave my guns at home and don't take my guns to town like young Billy Joe who thought he was a man. Johnny Cash fans will remember that one. For every fire arm used in legal self defense there must be a hundred use in homicides the result of some silly altercation someone should have ignored instead of engaging some word not allowed he would probably never see again.  And then there's accidents.  The thought of being locked up in prison with a bunch of animals scares me worse then death. I figure statistically a fire arm in my car or on my person is much more likely to get me in trouble then used for legit defense.  

  I spent near thirty years in route sales going in and out some rough places, carrying large sums of collection cash often during dark. My poor wife was in banking forty years and a few times had to face some hopped up fool waving a gun yelling give me the f****** money. In no case would having a gun have made things turn out better.

  All those years we just committed our safety to the good Lord each morning  and to date it works.

If I can add one thing about the "wild west", most of the idea of the west being so violent was the result of pulp fiction in the 1880s. The idea of the quick draw duel was rare to never and violence was much worse back east in the big cities. People back then probably worked so hard from sun up to sun down there probably wasn't much left for anything else. I'm sure towns had their gaudy sections but from what I've seen in some documentaries and books the "West" was no worse then anywhere else of the day. Don't take you're history from Hollywood folks:) 

ABC News just reported there was a live round in the gun. There also was a box of ammunition with a mixture of fakes. blanks and live rounds.  Uh oh!

 

Bill W

What I don't get, is Alec Baldwin who has a history of anti NRA and pro gun control beliefs, and yet here he is at his age co-writing, producing, lead acting in a film that glorifies guns. Hollywood is a bizarre hypocritical place indeed 

Just leave these Westerns to the likes of Clint Eastwood and Co, I think that is the lesson learned here

11 minutes ago, Matthew Kane said:

Clint Eastwood

Gun nutbag!

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

I told my wife that when we got back home we would get a 747 engine for the bedroom to get him to sleep.

I find it relaxing as well.
https://music.apple.com/us/album/airplane-travel-training-for-babies/407952665
 

 

27 minutes ago, BillW said:

ABC News just reported there was a live round in the gun. There also was a box of ammunition with a mixture of fakes. blanks and live rounds.  Uh oh!

 

Bill W

Step right up! Place your bets! Pick a bullet! Any bullet! Don't crowd and shove, plenty room for all.

7 hours ago, dave2013 said:

You never really *need* anything, until you do, that is.

Dave

thats why i said  luckily i live in oz

5 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

True Dave. But risk is always present in life. So the important factor is "probability". And in Australia and the UK and elsewhere in the world, given that the probability of being shot is so low, we don't need guns. 

Now if I lived in certain locations in the US, I would have gun turret on my roof, Claymore's around the perimeter, a high calibre pistol with awesome stopping power, a Star Trek style force field and one of those experimental Pancor Jackhammers that never made it into production. 

I'm kidding of course, but you get the principle. 🙂

Dont  need  to kid  about what you  wrote  is  almost  about  true,  my parents  have  friends  that live in South Africa and  their  house  is  a fortress 🙂 pity  we  have  to live  like  this,  would  be  so much  easier if  guns  were  banned every  where

2 hours ago, Adrian123 said:

Gun nutbag!

You really need to do some research before making a comment like that. If you take the time to sit back and look at things I think you'll find that Eastwood has been an advocate of gun control for almost 50 years. He's not just another Dirty Harry in real life.

2 hours ago, pete_auau said:

would  be  so much  easier if  guns  were  banned every  where

People would just find another way to kill each other, the gun is just an easier, more efficient way to do it. Next up would be a stabbing epidemic. 

Unfortunately even if guns were banned everywhere, it wouldn’t solve the criminal element of shady people finding a source for them.

32 minutes ago, cmpbellsjc said:

Unfortunately even if guns were banned everywhere, it wouldn’t solve the criminal element of shady people finding a source for them.

Even our last 'Terrorist Attack' we had in New Zealand, the perpetrator was on a terrorist watch list and under 24 hour Police Surveillance, at the time he went into the grocery store to buy groceries and the agents that were following him stayed in the parking lot not worried about it at the time, that was when he took a kitchen knife off the shelf and started stabbing other customers. 

so yes this is correct, even under really really expensive and evasive police supervision someone will find a way to cause as much damage as they can. You can ban gun ownership, as they did with this guy, and watch him 24 hours a day, and yet he will still find a way to cause harm. 

Following this incident New Zealand removed all kitchen knives from grocery store shelves as a result, so also true when you start banning things their is no end to that too
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/126285302/countdown-foodstuffs-remove-knives-from-sale-following-terror-attack

So that begs the question, how far do you go with banning things in this world because Someone Might Get Hurt 😩

Edited October 28, 20214 yr by Matthew Kane

38 minutes ago, cmpbellsjc said:

People would just find another way to kill each other, the gun is just an easier, more efficient way to do it. Next up would be a stabbing epidemic. 

Unfortunately even if guns were banned everywhere, it wouldn’t solve the criminal element of shady people finding a source for them.

but at least you take  away  one  element  of  harm

30 minutes ago, pete_auau said:

but at least you take  away  one  element  of  harm

And replace it with another, for example Hannah Clarke and her children, to be honest I would rather be shot to death then be burned to death, but doesn't matter the method the outcome is the same

1 hour ago, pete_auau said:

but at least you take  away  one  element  of  harm

True, but unsavory people will always find a way to inflict harm/death on other people, they’ve been doing it for 1000’s of years already.

We could ban guns, knives, saws, axes, and whatever else you can think of, but that wouldn’t stop people from manufacturing their own lethal devices. If there’s a market for banned items/weapons, someone will find a way to manufacture fill that market and make a lot of money doing it.