Minimum number of guns?

[Coffin-Breathe]

Sport Shooting is apparently illegal. Special Dispensation has to be given for the Olympic shooting events to go ahead, apparently.

...this might explain the British predilection for fox hunts then...
So basically you say in Britain it´s prohibited for private persons to possess guns (with some exceptions, of course, as we all know there´s always a way for the wealthy); it´s almost the same in Austria...

[Cabra West]

Sport Shooting is apparently illegal. Special Dispensation has to be given for the Olympic shooting events to go ahead, apparently.

...this might explain the British predilection for fox hunts then...
So basically you say in Britain it´s prohibited for private persons to possess guns (with some exceptions, of course, as we all know there´s always a way for the wealthy); it´s almost the same in Austria...

The difference is, in Britain as well as over here, most police don't carry any firearms, either.
I like it, as it makes for a whole lot less people dead because of nervous cops in the area.

[South Norwega]

Sport Shooting is apparently illegal. Special Dispensation has to be given for the Olympic shooting events to go ahead, apparently.

...this might explain the British predilection for fox hunts then...
So basically you say in Britain it´s prohibited for private persons to possess guns (with some exceptions, of course, as we all know there´s always a way for the wealthy); it´s almost the same in Austria...

I think as in countries like Australia one needs a "valid reason" to own a gun in the UK. Northern Ireland is more liberal than the rest of the UK, in that they accept Self-Defence as a "valid reason" for owning a firearm.

[Glorious Freedonia]

What is, in your opinion, the minimum number of guns people should be required to keep in their house? I lean towards only one, but of course, there can be a greater number (one per person, one per room, etc.) What's your opinion?

I do not think that people should be required to have guns. Gun ownership is a moral obligation but I do not think that people should get into legal trouble for not owning one.

[Coffin-Breathe]

Gun ownership is a moral obligation

Had some weird mushroom soup for dinner, or what ?
People having access to firearms should be of the very stable and ethical kind (which in fact, they seldom are) and seriously been tested; I´d say, your statement above definitely cancels your person out from claiming membership in this "elite" circle...
...or did I get something wrong in the process of translation ?

[Charlotte Ryberg]

In my opinion possessing guns should be optional, not accounting for the licensing requirements in the UK.

[Renzenia]

I say one to two per room. like a shotgun and a pistol in the same room.

[Coffin-Breathe]

ooh, yeah, this is really one thread to see all those gun-obsessive teenagers lining up...as well as all those "civil-rights-experts" who are thinking, it´s okay for the police to bash your door in without any reason and for the government to monitor every step you take and to overwatch your cell-phones, as long as they can claim their beloved "right" of possessing some gun (to be shot down then at the very moment, as, bwuahahaha, it´s everyones right...).

[United Russian State]

One for every five persons in house.

[The_pantless_hero]

Enough for a Mexican stand-off between every idiot who thinks they have to have a gun.

[Glorious Freedonia]

Gun ownership is a moral obligation

Had some weird mushroom soup for dinner, or what ?
People having access to firearms should be of the very stable and ethical kind (which in fact, they seldom are) and seriously been tested; I´d say, your statement above definitely cancels your person out from claiming membership in this "elite" circle...
...or did I get something wrong in the process of translation ?

That was a rather mean and insulting post. I am not crazy. I am not under the effects of any hallucinations. You have a nasty prejudice against the majority of Americans by saying that we, the firearm owners, are mostly unethical and unstable.

A well armed citizenry is important for the long term health of any democracy. In even smaller terms, a well armed neighborhood is important in the event that there is a neighborhood emergency.

When you hear a disturbance at the neighbor's house, you call 911 and arm yourself and assist until the police show up. It is just what you do. When your neighbor hears a disturbance at your house, they do the same thing. If the system breaks down because someone does not do their part, they should not go to jail for it or be fined but they certainly failed to meet their moral obligation to their neighbors.

The same is true for the nation as is true for the neighborhood. If there is a coup detat, the citizens arm themselves and organize for the preservation of their way of life. It is for these reasons that armed societies are stable ones. Of course, there is a need to regulate guns by keeping them out of the hands of those who have decided to live criminal lifestyles. I do not think that the prisoner in his cell or the released felon needs to be armed for the sake of safety of the community, in fact I think the opposite is true and that these people should be disarmed.

[Alsatian Knights]

Gun ownership is a moral obligation

Had some weird mushroom soup for dinner, or what ?
People having access to firearms should be of the very stable and ethical kind (which in fact, they seldom are) and seriously been tested; I´d say, your statement above definitely cancels your person out from claiming membership in this "elite" circle...
...or did I get something wrong in the process of translation ?

I bet if we went by your definition of "very stable" and "ethical" it would be ethical to not own a gun? I would like to see the rest of the world ban guns from their private citizens that way they'll be crappy soldiers when we invade them.

[Chumblywumbly]

Gun ownership is a moral obligation...

For whom?

Presumably not for young children, etc.?

[Alsatian Knights]

Gun ownership is a moral obligation...

For whom?

Presumably not for young children, etc.?

I was 5 when I first fired my gun 6 when I got my first .22 Ruger.

[Chumblywumbly]

I was 5 when I first fired my gun 6 when I got my first .22 Ruger.

I'm not saying young children are incapable of firing guns, I'm questioning whether young children are immoral if they do not own a firearm.

[Alsatian Knights]

I was 5 when I first fired my gun 6 when I got my first .22 Ruger.

I'm not saying young children are incapable of firing guns, I'm questioning whether young children are immoral if they do not own a firearm.

Well according to Catholics...

[JJ Place]

What is, in your opinion, the minimum number of guns people should be required to keep in their house? I lean towards only one, but of course, there can be a greater number (one per person, one per room, etc.) What's your opinion?

Required: 0
How many do I think you should have: As many, or lack there of, guns that you want. The more guns you have, the safer you are, in my opinion. We can keep our safe and secure, and out of hands of those who don't want having guns (young children) but if you want to be completly unsafe and unprotected, with only a flimsy door and police that will be there in 10 minutes, twice as long as it takes the average criminal to do anything they want, be my guest. I would advice that everyone keep at least one handheld gun locked and loaded somewhere in the house, just to be on the safe side.

[Tkdkidsx2]

Uh... 0? Maximum should be somewhere to the point where your house is filled from floor to ceiling in guns.

[Gun Manufacturers]

...a little question in between : has anyone of you self-appointed security and self-defense experts ever been robbed or assaulted inside his own house (if at least you even live in your own household) ? And if (which I doubt), was (or would have been) the possession of a gun in the house providing some help or changing the fact ? Any real experience here ?

Would you consider being in the military a "real experience"?

No ! The question was about any experience with being assaulted or robbed in your own household, not about any experience with guns...

Didn't have to say it so mean
My mom was assaulted in our house with a knife, I pulled a gun on him and pulled the trigger (The damn thing jammed though) he got the message and ran away.

What was the weapon, and do you know why it jammed?

Ruger 10/22 Carbine, It jammed because the mag I was using was fucked up, 30 round mag made of plastic and I once emptied it twice in a row.

Does it have to be guns? Melee weapons would be more appropriate for a home-invasion scenario... I'm thinking Riot Shield.

I will keep pressing this, Do you Melee weapon people know how hard it is to use a melee weapon in a house? Especially with someone coming at you with intent to kill? Anything more than an 8-inch knife and you are gonna have a problem.

Was it a Shooters Ridge 10/22 Magazine? I've heard quite a few complaints about those.

[2nd PLT]

...a little question in between : has anyone of you self-appointed security and self-defense experts ever been robbed or assaulted inside his own house (if at least you even live in your own household) ? And if (which I doubt), was (or would have been) the possession of a gun in the house providing some help or changing the fact ? Any real experience here ?

Would you consider being in the military a "real experience"?

No ! The question was about any experience with being assaulted or robbed in your own household, not about any experience with guns...

Didn't have to say it so mean
My mom was assaulted in our house with a knife, I pulled a gun on him and pulled the trigger (The damn thing jammed though) he got the message and ran away.

What was the weapon, and do you know why it jammed?

Ruger 10/22 Carbine, It jammed because the mag I was using was fucked up, 30 round mag made of plastic and I once emptied it twice in a row.

Does it have to be guns? Melee weapons would be more appropriate for a home-invasion scenario... I'm thinking Riot Shield.

I will keep pressing this, Do you Melee weapon people know how hard it is to use a melee weapon in a house? Especially with someone coming at you with intent to kill? Anything more than an 8-inch knife and you are gonna have a problem.

Was it a Shooters Ridge 10/22 Magazine? I've heard quite a few complaints about those.

Possibly. I don't have it near me right now (I switched back to the stock mag) I just remember that it was a see through plastic Banana clip.

[Cabra West]

That was a rather mean and insulting post. I am not crazy. I am not under the effects of any hallucinations. You have a nasty prejudice against the majority of Americans by saying that we, the firearm owners, are mostly unethical and unstable.

A well armed citizenry is important for the long term health of any democracy. In even smaller terms, a well armed neighborhood is important in the event that there is a neighborhood emergency.

When you hear a disturbance at the neighbor's house, you call 911 and arm yourself and assist until the police show up. It is just what you do. When your neighbor hears a disturbance at your house, they do the same thing. If the system breaks down because someone does not do their part, they should not go to jail for it or be fined but they certainly failed to meet their moral obligation to their neighbors.

The same is true for the nation as is true for the neighborhood. If there is a coup detat, the citizens arm themselves and organize for the preservation of their way of life. It is for these reasons that armed societies are stable ones. Of course, there is a need to regulate guns by keeping them out of the hands of those who have decided to live criminal lifestyles. I do not think that the prisoner in his cell or the released felon needs to be armed for the sake of safety of the community, in fact I think the opposite is true and that these people should be disarmed.

You know, I live in a neighbourhood without guns, and I'm quite glad about that. The last thing I want if there should be a disturbance of any kind is armed and confused neighbours rushing to the scene. If the police are needed, the police will get called, but they, too, are more than likely unarmed.
Arming a neighbourhood is a surefirre way of arming small criminals. The more guns there are around, the more guns can and will get stolen, and the more guns are available to the wrong kind of people.

And the myth that an armed citizenry will rise up to defeat a coup d'etat is just that - a myth. Or do you seriously think any armed citizenry is going to stand even the glimmer of a chance against an army? Even a relatively poorly armed one? Seriously?

[Eire-United]

And the myth that an armed citizenry will rise up to defeat a coup d'etat is just that - a myth. Or do you seriously think any armed citizenry is going to stand even the glimmer of a chance against an army? Even a relatively poorly armed one? Seriously?

The IRA did pretty well

[Cabra West]

And the myth that an armed citizenry will rise up to defeat a coup d'etat is just that - a myth. Or do you seriously think any armed citizenry is going to stand even the glimmer of a chance against an army? Even a relatively poorly armed one? Seriously?

The IRA did pretty well

So did Ghandi. It's a slight difference if you're fighting against a dying empire that is stretching itself on far too many fronts, or if you are fighting an actual coup d'etat.

[2nd PLT]

That was a rather mean and insulting post. I am not crazy. I am not under the effects of any hallucinations. You have a nasty prejudice against the majority of Americans by saying that we, the firearm owners, are mostly unethical and unstable.

A well armed citizenry is important for the long term health of any democracy. In even smaller terms, a well armed neighborhood is important in the event that there is a neighborhood emergency.

When you hear a disturbance at the neighbor's house, you call 911 and arm yourself and assist until the police show up. It is just what you do. When your neighbor hears a disturbance at your house, they do the same thing. If the system breaks down because someone does not do their part, they should not go to jail for it or be fined but they certainly failed to meet their moral obligation to their neighbors.

The same is true for the nation as is true for the neighborhood. If there is a coup detat, the citizens arm themselves and organize for the preservation of their way of life. It is for these reasons that armed societies are stable ones. Of course, there is a need to regulate guns by keeping them out of the hands of those who have decided to live criminal lifestyles. I do not think that the prisoner in his cell or the released felon needs to be armed for the sake of safety of the community, in fact I think the opposite is true and that these people should be disarmed.

You know, I live in a neighbourhood without guns, and I'm quite glad about that. The last thing I want if there should be a disturbance of any kind is armed and confused neighbours rushing to the scene. If the police are needed, the police will get called, but they, too, are more than likely unarmed.
Arming a neighbourhood is a surefirre way of arming small criminals. The more guns there are around, the more guns can and will get stolen, and the more guns are available to the wrong kind of people.

And the myth that an armed citizenry will rise up to defeat a coup d'etat is just that - a myth. Or do you seriously think any armed citizenry is going to stand even the glimmer of a chance against an army? Even a relatively poorly armed one? Seriously?

Happened at least once before.
America-War of independence
Oh more I just thought of
Cuba
Russia
FranceEngland-Actually if I remember right it was the Scots against the English, I don't know much about this one so it's a bad example.
I think there were uprisings in Rome
well the list goes on and on
Vietnam-They kicked the combined asses of the ARVN and USA, and the french before.
China
Seriously the list goes on.
I am aware that most of these aren't about the citizenry defeating a military Coup but they are about armed citizenry defeating an army.
It just happens to be that you can only push people so far before they push back, (And in this case start a rebellion) BTW Guerrilla Tactics are specifically for the purpose of an under manned and equipped army or rebel force to destroy a much more powerful force, and it works pretty damn well.

One more thing I just wanted to say

When you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them.

My dad told me that but I suspect he heard it from somewhere else.

[Eire-United]

And the myth that an armed citizenry will rise up to defeat a coup d'etat is just that - a myth. Or do you seriously think any armed citizenry is going to stand even the glimmer of a chance against an army? Even a relatively poorly armed one? Seriously?

The IRA did pretty well

So did Ghandi. It's a slight difference if you're fighting against a dying empire that is stretching itself on far too many fronts, or if you are fighting an actual coup d'etat.

Ah so now you make your requirements of what is a PROPER rebellion. Move those goalposts.