RNS Quote of the Day: 11/16/06

7 Responses to RNS Quote of the Day: 11/16/06

1. Steve says:

   November 16, 2006 at 7:56 am

   Very true. Maybe that explains my sudden desire to get 75 round magazines for the wasr/ak.
2. DFWMTX says:

   November 16, 2006 at 12:58 pm

   I don’t buy “naughty rifles” *only* because they don’t want me to have them. I own these rifles because there’s lots of jerks out there who’d like to break into my house, take my stuff or force me to follow their beliefs or die. They’re why I own these rifles and these hi-cap magazines and all these bullets.

   And my rifles aren’t naughty unless someone pastes a Playboy centerfold on the stock. My guns are well-behaved; they don’t do anything unless I or someone holding them make them do something.
3. Rivrdog says:

   November 17, 2006 at 8:01 am

   Actually that’s not a very good reason to buy them. See Rule #23 of the USMC Gunfighting Code: (paraphrased) Your best overall chance of survival is gained by having a plan to master the battlefield, but also making constant attempts to reduce the conflict that brings you there.

   I buy “black” rifles so as to be able to master that battlefield, but I DON’T think that it’s a good idea to brag about it constantly, in fact, I’m rethinking the whole idea of gunblogging because of this principle.
4. Kyle says:

   November 17, 2006 at 11:13 am

   Rivrdog, that’s why I don’t gunblog. 😉
5. Grumpy Old Ham says:

   November 17, 2006 at 3:17 pm

   Rivrdog,

   I’d be interested in hearing a longer discussion on that point over on Paratus. Seems to me you’re trying to resolve the following questions:

   1. What is the deterrence value of having sufficient weapons for neutralizing a known threat and advertising that capablility?

   vs.

   2. What is the risk that some moron will pick a fight with you (or confiscate your armory) simply because you have the weapons and make known that fact?

   I’ve been thinking a lot lately about both micro- (i.e., personal/individual vs. criminals) and macro- (i.e., nation-state vs. terrorist group) level deterrence and coming up short of ideas — especially about the latter.
6. Heartless Libertarian says:

   November 17, 2006 at 9:41 pm

   Actually, my primary weapon for defending my home/family/stuff-at least on my home ground-is a relatively tame, mechanically at least, pump shotgun.

   Now, it’s had some mean/evil/naughty looking accessories bolted on. Accessories that cost more than the gun itself, actually.

   Although, if you read the first post (the quote was in an addendum), I may supplement that with something more ‘evil’.

7. Pingback: Random Nuclear Strikes » Let’s talk this out

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.