Farangs With Guns!

[Pudgimelon]

I truly believe that one should give a lot of thought to owning a handgun, they are not meant to protect property they are meant to kill people.

My humble thoughts

Ray.

Couldn't agree more. Excellent points in your post.

I grew up in a "gun culture", where getting a gun was just another right of passage between boyhood and manhood. But before we were allowed to get a gun, we had it hammered into us that a gun was NEVER meant to be pointed at another person.

From our first BB gun to our first .22 rifle, we were supervised, trained and scolded on good "gun manners". The barrel of the weapon was never allowed to pass over another person, because we were taught that you only pointed the gun at something you intended to shoot. So to point a weapon at a person was a HUGE insult, and your friends were more likely to kick your ass over it than your parents.

Handguns are a weapon with ONE purpose: to point at another person and threaten (or implement) lethal force. And that goes against every tenet of good gun manners. It's just NOT done.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that I'm suggesting you should be "polite" to some knife-wielding maniac charging at you. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that a handgun has only one use: to kill. It cannot "defend" life or property, it cannot provide you with a warning against possible attack, and it cannot contact the authorities for assistance.

It does NOTHING all by itself. It requires a user, and that user must have the INTENT to kill in order to use that weapon "properly". At which point, you've crossed over the line from "defending" yourself to "punishing" your assailant.

That is not a tolerable thing to have in a civil society.

[jackr]

It does NOTHING all by itself.  It requires a user, and that user must have the INTENT to kill in order to use that weapon "properly".  At which point, you've crossed over the line from "defending" yourself to "punishing" your assailant.

That is not a tolerable thing to have in a civil society.

Burglars, druggies and terrorists should not have to be tolerated with...period, and should all be destroyed!!

[Khutan]

I was reading through this thread as there seems to have been so much attention and I saw this.

In both of the cases you mentioned, the gun was never discharged, in which case, a REAL gun was not needed to protect yourself. A realistic replica would have done exactly the same job and you would have protected yourself just as effectively.

Sorry, I cannot remember thr Author.

Guns are meant for delivering lethal force, not for showing. Consider if I walk into your home with my (stupidly) 9mm tucked down my shorts. You flash your replica Luger or Walther or the Cigarette Lighter that looks like a gun, and my 9mm apprears and I pull the hammer back...... I think I am going to get shot and I have a loaded and live weapon, you have a replica, or its not loaded, where is this going to escalate ?

At the end of the day, anyone in any country can arm themselves as heavily as they like, I mean why stop at a hand-gun, and why not get an M-16 with the optional (sorry forget the part #) grenade hurler? Surely when you slide the grenade into the hurler, that would frighten anyone.

But seriously, if you must First and foremost, get training on how to operate the thing, like how to clean it and where the safety is. To me the most important part of a gun is the safety. Then learn how to fire it correctly and not shoot the wrong person OR break your wrist.

Lastly, the person talking about someone in your house Raping your wife, daughter etc, you have a gun in your hand, from my actual memory of trying to stop this, you cannot get a proper shot without endangering the person being raped. Think about it, the round will either travel through the person you want to subdue and shoot your loved one or the shock of the round will damage the other person. Its not loke you can lean over and shoot the rapist in the side of the head, apart from the hearing damage, and IF the guy stayed still long enough, that can also damage your loved one.

Next scenario, you have a loaded 9mm, and the bad guy comes through the door and it just happens to be you are watching Home at 10 and splaying with the loaded weapon..... So you start blasting because he has a knine, gun etc. Just think if you miss, where are the misses going, into your neighbours bedroom, into a school etc etc, trust me if you are going to fire and miss and kill someone innocent, that will get you into trouble, even in the army, and I am sure the police here would not be too happy if you did that. You have to practice and practice, until you can do it as second nature.

I am not saying I like or hate guns, they are just tools for killing, that is all, just if you buy one, make sure you know ALL the risks of its ownership and use, otherwise the best intentions in the world will go bad.

[stumonster]

if you hunt around , tactical nuclear hand grenades should be available at chukdukjuk market...

add to your home defense, sensor activated lights

[Khutan]

add to your home defense, sensor activated lights

Stumonster;

Absolutly; Although sometimes hard to find here in the LOS, they are excellent, and even out in the jungle,they give the locals an absolute scare when they are activated...... Sure the village fortune-teller would have an opinion.

[Pudgimelon]

Burglars, druggies and terrorists should not have to be tolerated with...period, and should all be destroyed!!

Yes, bad people should be punished, and evil people should be destroyed, I can't agree with you more on those points.

However, I don't think we need to abandoned civilized behavior in order to accomplish that goal.

My point in bringing up "gun manners" is that in a truly civilized "gun culture" a firearm would NEVER be pointed at another person. In a gun culture (such as the one that exists in rural America), a gun is a tool that is used for sport and predation. In those roles, a firearm is a fine addition to the rural lifestyle. For example, the deer herd in North America is probably bigger and healthier that it has been in over hundred years, due in large part to sensible culling of the deer herd using rifles.

In that role, the rifle takes it's place as a proper tool that the human predator uses to kill prey, and thus it is a perfectly natural and sensible thing for a person to have, IF and ONLY IF that is there INTENTION. Do you intend to eat the people you shoot? No?? Then why are you using a hunting tool to "defend" yourself?

The minute you start thinking about guns for "self defense", you are by default intending to use that weapon IMPROPERLY.

Every thing I've ever been taught about guns (in school, at home, by my friends, and out in the field) has hammered home the point that a gun is NEVER pointed at another person. EVER. Even if unloaded with the safety on. It just isn't done. It is a highly improper handling of that weapon, and demonstrates a complete disrespect for the social covenant that protects EVERYONE from harm.

By purchasing a gun for "self defense", you are implicitly breaking the social covenant that protects ALL of us (including YOU), because you are stating from the get-go that you intend to point that weapon at another human being, and if necessary, discharge it. THAT makes YOU the one escalating the violence in our culture, because YOU have decided to break the social covenant and purchase a weapon with the INTENT to do harm.

I'm well-aware that there are plenty of criminals out there who've broken the social covenant and intend to do innocent people (like me) harm. But that DOES NOT mean I have to JOIN them to put a stop to it!!

Even in the deep South--which is on the brink of open warfare--there are good, EFFECTIVE alternatives for self defense that don't escalate the potential for violence in the COMMUNITY. Some have been examined here in this thread, but I'm sure there are plenty more.

Going hunting? Buy a gun. Kill something. Eat it.

That is a proper use of a firearm, in humanity's natural role as a predator in the environment. Deer, wild turkeys, ducks and geese all NEED to be hunted by some sort of predator in order to prevent starvation and disease. Since humans have stupidly erradicated most of our rival predators (mountain lions, wolves, and bear), it is now our responsibility to properly cull herds and flocks to maintain the health of wild animal populations.

Protecting your home? Buy a fence, alarm, light-timer, and a dog.

All of these things are PROVEN to be FAR more effect at protecting your home. After all, the best way to protect your home is to DISCOURAGE ENTRY. So unless you intend to sit at the window every night, twirling your six-shooter, you're going to have a hard time keeping robbers OUT while you're sleeping in your bed. They don't know you've got a piece under your pillow, so having one isn't going to stop a break in, now is it?

Protecting yourself and your loved ones? Live some place where you can trust the police to do their jobs and/or get life insurance.

Life is a risk. You can't go around being paranoid and arming yourself to the teeth to "protect" yourself from preceived threats. Take reasonable precautions, stay out of dangerous situations, and avoid conflicts, and you'll do fine without ever having to "flash a piece" to get "respect".

[Boh Bpen Yang]

Burglars, druggies and terrorists should not have to be tolerated with...period, and should all be destroyed!!

Yes, bad people should be punished, and evil people should be destroyed, I can't agree with you more on those points.

Yep

However, I don't think we need to abandoned civilized behavior in order to accomplish that goal.

We can rely on the police to do the dirty work?

My point in bringing up "gun manners" is that in a truly civilized "gun culture" a firearm would NEVER be pointed at another person. In a gun culture (such as the one that exists in rural America), a gun is a tool that is used for sport and predation. In those roles, a firearm is a fine addition to the rural lifestyle. For example, the deer herd in North America is probably bigger and healthier that it has been in over hundred years, due in large part to sensible culling of the deer herd using rifles.

In that role, the rifle takes it's place as a proper tool that the human predator uses to kill prey, and thus it is a perfectly natural and sensible thing for a person to have, IF and ONLY IF that is there INTENTION.

But the minute you start thinking about guns for "self defense", you are by default intending to use that weapon IMPROPERLY.

Every thing I've ever been taught about guns (in school, at home, by my friends, and out in the field) has hammered home the point that a gun is NEVER pointed at another person. EVER. Even if unloaded with the safety on. It just isn't done. It is a highly improper handling of that weapon, and demonstrates a complete disrespect for the social covenant that protects EVERYONE from harm.

Do you intend to eat the people you shoot? No?? Then why are you using a hunting tool to "defend" yourself?

By purchasing a gun for "self defense", you are implicitly breaking the social covenant that protects ALL of us (including YOU), because you are stating from the get-go that you intend to point that weapon at another human being, and if necessary, discharge it. THAT makes YOU the one escalating the violence in our culture, because YOU have decided to break the social covenant and purchase a weapon with the INTENT to do harm.

I'm well-aware that there are plenty of criminals out there who've broken the social covenant and intend to do innocent people (like me) harm. But that DOES NOT mean I have to JOIN them to put a stop to it!!

Even in the deep South--which is on the brink of open warfare--there are good, EFFECTIVE alternatives for self defense that don't escalate the potential for violence in the COMMUNITY. Some have been examined here in this thread, but I'm sure there are plenty more.

Going hunting? Buy a gun. Kill something. Eat it.

I believe the right to bear arms was written into the US bill of rights as protection and security against a government that may go wrong. As without that, there would be no USA.

I personally do not own a gun for the simple reason; it is admitting that the world has deteriorated to the point that I must feel afraid. I refuse to live my life that way. If I am wrong I die, if I am right I live without fear. One of those live free or die things.

[stroll]

Burglars, druggies and terrorists should not have to be tolerated with...period, and should all be destroyed!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ohh, that's what you want a gun for. There is a good reason you favor an offensive weapon over all the other options: These guys should be destroyed, and you are the one to judge. A very responsible attitude to gun ownership. It confirms all my assumptions about guncrazies, the aim is to kill, not to defend.

[igotworms]

Say what you will.  You know as I do, this land is ungoverned.  Next time you step outside, take a long look.  There are no institutions of protection here.  This place is lawless. 

But, we are all at the mercy of our own perception.  For some, the term, 'ignorance is bliss' aptly applies.

Curious, isn't, that those advocating gun ownership insist they are responsibly acting citizens with an accurate sense of judgement, while others are ignorant to the level of dangers or at best naive. Yet they think it to be a reasonable, measured response to point a shotgun at a beggar and consider Thailand a lawless place in which they need to protect themselves with a gun.

On the other hand, the 'ignorant' ones, like myself, are numerous and have walked through lifewithout being harmed, even in such ungoverned, lawless places like Thailand, in which survival necessitates preparing yourself to use guns against potential threats.

I agree, we are at the mercy of our perception, specially the irrate, paranoid gunnuts who bring about the very incidences they aim to prevent.

Please do not come to Thailand.

Spend a year or two in the south and perhaps you would gain an understanding of my perspective. Beggars are the least of our worries. Who said anything about beggars anyway?

Perhaps you've never been harmed, but do you know anyone who has? While living in Hatyai, I've known a few people who were directly affected by criminal activity. A fellow teacher's uncle (farang) had been murdered in his home, two people who were robbed at knifepoint (farangs), one guy who was robbed here in Phuket at gunpoint (farang), a chef who was murdered outside a restaurant 500 m from my house, farang girls who have been stalked by motorbike taxi guys and tuk-tuk drivers,...and the list goes on.

Perhaps, you and I have been lucky, but many others haven't been. Did I say that anti-gun enthusiasts were ignorant? No. Just those who fail to recognize that Thailand's criminal underground is massive and nearly unchecked.

[jackr]

Burglars, druggies and terrorists should not have to be tolerated with...period, and should all be destroyed!!

Ohh, that's what you want a gun for. There is a good reason you favor an offensive weapon over all the other options: These guys should be destroyed, and you are the one to judge. A very responsible attitude to gun ownership. It confirms all my assumptions about guncrazies, the aim is to kill, not to defend.

Yes, that's what I want a gun for and I am the one to judge that the one who enters my home with ill-intent needs to be dealt with. I am, in all actuality, an easy going guy and not in the least bit crazy but find the people trying, in vain, to explain away not having a suitable means of protecting one's loved ones a bit strange.

[jackr]

By purchasing a gun for "self defense", you are implicitly breaking the social covenant that protects ALL of us (including YOU), because you are stating from the get-go that you intend to point that weapon at another human being, and if necessary, discharge it.  THAT makes YOU the one escalating the violence in our culture, because YOU have decided to break the social covenant and purchase a weapon with the INTENT to do harm.

...blah, blah, blah...I'm not escalating any violence, I'm preventing myself and the people I love from being hurt. You can try and explain away all your statistical drivel as long as you want and tell me that I've more chance of shooting myself in the foot or getting pissed and taking my, unlikely, rage out on my wife, but it doesn't disuade me in the slightest that I shouldn't have that protection.

[stroll]

Fair enough, I guess this is where the argument can't go further.

From your first post, it is clear that you know your preparing this type of defense is illegal in many countries, and you would have difficulties obtaining a license in Thailand as well, if it is officially possible for foreigners at all. Ownership of guns without license is criminal. Be prepared for the consequences of any illegal actions and of the state taking measures to protect society from criminals.

In your own words, "they need to be destroyed".

[Pudgimelon]

Yes, that's what I want a gun for and I am the one to judge that the one who enters my home with ill-intent needs to be dealt with.

Reminds me of the time in Louisiana when a group of exchanged students stopped at a house to ask directions. A Japanese kid got out of the car and approached the house, but the "responsible" and "properly-trained" gun-owner came to the door with a shotgun, and shooted, "Freeze!"

Unfortunately, the "responsible" gun-owner was under the mistaken impression that everyone on the planet is familiar with American cop-movie slang, and so when the kid didn't stop immediately, the "properly-trained" gun-owner blew him in half.

That's something the Judge-Jury-and-Executioner crowd might want to remember. You guys aren't all-knowing and infallible.

[Pudgimelon]

but find the people trying, in vain, to explain away not having a suitable means of protecting one's loved ones a bit strange.

Nobody is suggesting you shouldn't protect your loved ones.

What is being objected to is your definition of the words: "suitable" or "effective".

It is a clearly provable fact that a gun is NOT a suitable or effective means of defense. That can be clearly shown in any number of statistical surveys, many of which I've already quoted in this thread.

What you want is to feel safe, and that's perfectly fine. But you are mistaken if you believe a gun will make you safe. IT WILL NOT.

For all your talk about "defending your loved ones", you seem awfully flippant about dismissing the dangers of gun-ownership. They are negilible. They are real and significant, and the fact that you dismiss them so easily shows that it's not really your loved ones you care about. You are either just itching to show-off and be a tough-guy (which means you're a highly unsafe gun-owner), or you just need a pacifier to suck on since you miss your mommy's teat.

Either way, your logic for getting a gun is fundamentally flawed, since you deem a gun "necessary" for self-defense without having fully considered the alternatives or the risks.

[Pudgimelon]

...blah, blah, blah...I'm not escalating any violence, I'm preventing myself and the people I love from being hurt. You can try and explain away all your statistical drivel as long as you want and tell me that I've more chance of shooting myself in the foot or getting pissed and taking my, unlikely, rage out on my wife, but it doesn't disuade me in the slightest that I shouldn't have that protection.

Who said anything about not having protection?

Nobody here is suggesting that you should leave your doors open all night or walk down a dark alley flashing 1000 baht notes.

It's just your notion that a "gun = protection" that is flawed.

You're flat-out WRONG on that point, and the fact that you dismiss evidence that contradicts your viewpoint as "statistical drivel" shows that you really aren't THINKING about this purchase.

You've made up your mind to get a gun, without understanding the ramifications or the risks, and THAT makes you a bad gun-owner.

A lot of good points have been raised by myself and others, and you've dismissed it all with an arrogant wave of hand, and said, "It doesn't matter what you people say, I'm going to do whatever I want!"

Again, not a good attitude to have in a gun-owner.

Owning a gun implies a responsibility, but not just to yourself or your loved ones, but also to the community as a whole. You're bringing a weapon into your community that has the POTENTIAL to harm anyone in it, and therefore you need to carefully consider the ramifications of what you are doing.

Proper-training is a must, as is proper storage and security for the weapon (yes, you need to PROTECT the gun). But more importantly, gun-ownership requires a proper ATTITUDE. From your posts, I don't think you have such an attitude, so I'd recommend you rethink your bullheaded approach to getting a gun.

If you really care about your loved ones, you'll protect them from your own bad judgment.

[jackr]

...blah, blah, blah...I'm not escalating any violence, I'm preventing myself and the people I love from being hurt. You can try and explain away all your statistical drivel as long as you want and tell me that I've more chance of shooting myself in the foot or getting pissed and taking my, unlikely, rage out on my wife, but it doesn't disuade me in the slightest that I shouldn't have that protection.

Who said anything about not having protection?

Nobody here is suggesting that you should leave your doors open all night or walk down a dark alley flashing 1000 baht notes.

It's just your notion that a "gun = protection" that is flawed.

You're flat-out WRONG on that point, and the fact that you dismiss evidence that contradicts your viewpoint as "statistical drivel" shows that you really aren't THINKING about this purchase.

You've made up your mind to get a gun, without understanding the ramifications or the risks, and THAT makes you a bad gun-owner.

A lot of good points have been raised by myself and others, and you've dismissed it all with an arrogant wave of hand, and said, "It doesn't matter what you people say, I'm going to do whatever I want!"

Again, not a good attitude to have in a gun-owner.

Owning a gun implies a responsibility, but not just to yourself or your loved ones, but also to the community as a whole. You're bringing a weapon into your community that has the POTENTIAL to harm anyone in it, and therefore you need to carefully consider the ramifications of what you are doing.

Proper-training is a must, as is proper storage and security for the weapon (yes, you need to PROTECT the gun). But more importantly, gun-ownership requires a proper ATTITUDE. From your posts, I don't think you have such an attitude, so I'd recommend you rethink your bullheaded approach to getting a gun.

If you really care about your loved ones, you'll protect them from your own bad judgment.

...drivel

[Pudgimelon]

Perhaps you've never been harmed, but do you know anyone who has?  While living in Hatyai, I've known a few people who were directly affected by criminal activity.  A fellow teacher's uncle (farang) had been murdered in his home, two people who were robbed at knifepoint (farangs), one guy who was robbed here in Phuket at gunpoint (farang), a chef who was murdered outside a restaurant 500 m from my house, farang girls who have been stalked by motorbike taxi guys and tuk-tuk drivers,...and the list goes on.  Perhaps, you and I have been lucky, but many others haven't been.  Did I say that anti-gun enthusiasts were ignorant?  No.  Just those who fail to recognize that Thailand's criminal underground is massive and nearly unchecked.

You think that by owning a gun, YOU can single-handedly protect yourself and your loved ones from Thailand's "massive and unchecked criminal underground"??

Take a close look at all the examples you posted. Could a gun have PREVENTED any of these crimes??

Maybe.

But more likely: NO.

The guy murdered in his home? How many people you know who pack heat while at home? Someone breaks in while your sleeping, crapping, showering, eating, or watching TV and that gun you keep in the house is going to do JACK-S--T (except get STOLEN after they murder you and used in other crimes, thank you very much).

The people robbed at gunpoint and knifepoint? You think a gun would have saved them? Unless you're walking around with a gun IN YOUR HAND, how is a gun going to stop an assailant from pulling a weapon on you? And unless you live in a John Woo movie, you're not frigg'n likely to slap the knife out of his hand and pull your weapon before he sticks you. The more likely outcome will be that you piss yourself while he steals your money AND your gun (thank you very much).

The chef murdered outside a restaurant? Would a gun have saved him? Maybe, but even if he'd had a gun, how is that going to prevent an ambush in a back alley while he's taking out the trash?

The women getting stalked by tuk-tuk drivers? Is a gun going to save them? Maybe. But is she going to be willing to use it? And if she is, while she be correct or will she just gun down some innocent, but "suspicious-looking" taxi driver?? And in that moment she hestitates to make up her mind about drawing the weapon, an attacker could be on her. Once that's happened, a SELF-DEFENSE COURSE in unarmed combat would have done A LOT more to protect her than any gun buried at the bottom of her purse (have you ever seen the inside of a woman's purse? It takes them half-an-hour to find their keys, yet you expect them to whip out a gun in a crisis situation?). Again, the more likely outcome is that the woman will end up raped, robbed (again putting another gun on the streets, thank you very much).

While reading that DoJ statistical website I came around an interesting statistic: While most firearm THEFTS occur in home burglaries, 32% of thefts occur in a larceny from the person!!!!!

Does that register in your head??

Many guns are stolen right off their owners!!!!

Simply put: your delusion of "protection" endangers everyone else.

[Ice Treasure]

Yes, that's what I want a gun for and I am the one to judge that the one who enters my home with ill-intent needs to be dealt with.

Reminds me of the time in Louisiana when a group of exchanged students stopped at a house to ask directions. A Japanese kid got out of the car and approached the house, but the "responsible" and "properly-trained" gun-owner came to the door with a shotgun, and shooted, "Freeze!"

Unfortunately, the "responsible" gun-owner was under the mistaken impression that everyone on the planet is familiar with American cop-movie slang, and so when the kid didn't stop immediately, the "properly-trained" gun-owner blew him in half.

That's something the Judge-Jury-and-Executioner crowd might want to remember. You guys aren't all-knowing and infallible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent point. Why is it that everywhere in the world where people aren't trying to illegally overthrow governments and install their own pliable alternative, the need for a gun of any description raises its' head.

Please excuse my laughing AT posters defending the human right to own a gun (bare arms?), but at the end of every day, if you are afraid, you should be asking .. why?

Answer this question, and I will see y'all back in Alabammy honey.

Ice

[Ajarn]

Infant boy kills sister in gun game

Published on November 12, 2004

A nine-year-old girl died in a Ubon Ratchathani hospital yesterday after being shot in the chest on Wednesday night before by her infant brother while they were acting out their favourite movie scenes.

Grade-3 student Pornnapa Inla-or was shot on the left side of her chest by her four-year-old brother, Nong A, after their parents left them alone in a makeshift hut the family was living in while work was carried out on their home.

"We went to check on how the renovation work was going. We were only about 100 metres away from the hut," said the children's mother, Sunee Inla-or.

According to Nong A, Pornnapa was showing off a gun that her father had borrowed from a friend. He asked to hold the weapon and the two then began acting out hero and villain scenes.

"Suddenly, the gun suddenly went off and she was shot," said Sunee.

Nong A has been in shock since the incident, she added.

Pornnapa was rushed to a local hospital in Phibun Mangsahan district, where she later died.

The children's father Meechai Inla-or said he had borrowed the gun from a friend to protect his family against would-be robbers while the family camped out in the hut.

"It was me who left the gun unattended in the hut. It was my carelessness that caused this tragedy," he said.

The police will not press any charges while the parents grieve and arrange their daughter's funeral, said Pol Captain Taweedej Klaibutr, the case officer at Phibun Mangsahan police station.

"But after the funeral, we will need to consider whether they should be held accountable for their recklessness," he said. Sunee planned to bury her daughter near their home so that the family could feel that Pornnapa was nearby.

"It will take time for us to come to terms with her death. Until then, she will not be cremated," she said.

[davethailand]

Another house has been done on my village, Pistol whipped the girl (we know her, poor kid), Its a shame because the tight fcukers on the village won't club together to get security, And the slag who rents all the houses to the farangs does'nt give a monkeys, SO My lawyers spoken to me already, if this crap carrys on then i'll be buying and registering one.

[stroll]

The burglars will be glad to find another gun at their disposal when they break in while you're minding the Blues Factory...

[davethailand]

The burglars will be glad to find another gun at their disposal when they break in while you're minding the Blues Factory...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If we get one it will be kept locked up.

Luckily the house has always got the dogs and someone here.

[c130nav]

The burglars will be glad to find another gun at their disposal when they break in while you're minding the Blues Factory...

Or he could spend the money on new dvd player which would take the criminals all of thirty minutes to convert to cash and then a weapon.

[davethailand]

Thats a good point

[pop3]

The problem with all this gun debate is that the market is now being flodded with gun's so when most people have one we're all no better off.

[QUOTE]

davethailand, Pattaya is not issueing anymore gun licenses and hasnt for over a year

[davethailand]

I've been told if I want one, i can have one. (not sure actually)

[jackr]

I've been told if I want one, i can have one. (not sure actually)

Lock him up good, Dave

[GuestHouse]

If we get one it will be kept locked up.

I can just see this..

It's the middle of the night, there is the sound of breaking glass followed by a door opening. Yep, no doubt about it - someone is breaking in.

Now, where the &lt;deleted&gt; did I put the keys to the gun cupboard?

If I lived in a neighbourhood where I thought I need a gun, I'd up and move to a neighbourhood where I did not need a gun.

OK that is a personal choice and I accept not one that is easy to make if you've had your brain addled by too many John Wayne movies.

[davethailand]

Its not something everybody can do though.