Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 83
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Bartonsville, Pennsylvania
    (Monroe County)
    Age
    48
    Posts
    125
    Rep Power
    1766635

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    I wonder if he's ever had to hit a moving target that shoots back. i certainly wouldn't bet my life on 5 rounds.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Erie, Pennsylvania
    (Erie County)
    Posts
    6,586
    Rep Power
    21474856

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Quote Originally Posted by Didnotcomply89 View Post
    In a conversation with another gun owner today, he declared that if anyone needs more than five shots to end a threat then they have a big problem, as in the big problem is that you are incompetent, and that no one 'needs' 30 round magazines or 'assault weapons' (common sporting rifles). Your thoughts?

    Thanks.
    Did you tell him that you don't comply?
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggies Coach View Post
    Cause white people are awesome. Happy now......LOL.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
    (Dauphin County)
    Age
    39
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    21474843

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Should reference the Miami-Dade shoot out, that's a good one to explain why more rounds are needed.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout
    "Sometimes reasonable men must do unreasonable things."- Marvin Heemeyer

  4. #44
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    715
    Rep Power
    11334280

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunlawyer001
    If you need 30 rounds in your rifle to go deer hunting, then yes, you suck as a hunter.
    If you mean 30 rounds to hit one deer? yeah that might warrant some target practice. 30 rounds seems like

    overkill for a deer, but certainly not overkill for bipedal assailants.

    Quote Originally Posted by Parrisk
    I truly hope I would be able to stop the threat in 5 or less shots.. However I don't want to be

    standing there holding an unloaded pistol as the threat continues.
    The conversation would then probably devolve into 'what if' scenarios at that point, but I am in 100% agreement

    with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by MattMPA
    Shells in the clip?
    Precisely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bang
    Betcha he would limit a fist-fight to one fist.
    Gold.

    Quote Originally Posted by MT1
    Didnotcomply's acquaintance
    That's being too generous...



    There's a lot that I have gathered from the thread. There were also quite a few laughs. Comments were on the mark with my opinion- you don't know the venue sometimes, you don't know the situation and you don't know how many assailants will be coming for you. Based upon credible information provided by unclejumbo, it seems that the esteemed gun owner I encountered has not had the unfortunate displeasure to engage a moving target. Furthermore, I think the gun owner misunderstands exactly how much the human body can take under duress and with the correct motivation. If I had offered the story as evidence in support of carrying additional ammo- it would have been dismissed based upon the fact that civilians are not law enforcement officers. I fail to see the logic he is presenting as that is a red herring. Who BETTER than to study a profession that gets shot at?

    Gunlawyer001 is absolutely correct- self-defense is not another facet of hunting. I do not think you can apply some concepts in hunting to self-defense, although I am sure that there are some. The concept of limiting rounds in a fire fight based on the attitude that a hunter or marksman does not need many shots is grossly irritating, borderline disingenuous, ignorant, unwise, stupid and sometimes arrogant.The position of 'needing less rounds', to me does not come from a rational position and has (in my opinion) a lot to do with machoism and misapplying hunting fundamentals of an animal that cannot fight back to a two legged one that can. 'Humans shoot back, deer do not' would be a valid statement. I would be afraid for our species a bit if deer could operate a firearm. Not likely- given their appendages. shoulda taken the shot fatass!

    If someone is arguing that they only need five rounds, and that there is no need for 30 round semi-automatics, it is likely (but not impossible) that they do not own the weapon in question, they do not practice with the weapon in question, and they have not a) been in a firefight or b) studied or spoken to individuals who were in a firefight. But I am assuming that the gun owner came to all of his conclusions based on sound evidence and upon the assumption that he thought about any of this. I doubt that he did- but I do not doubt that my opinion would be dismissed out of purposeful ignorance.

    Parrisk echoes exactly how I feel about the situation of having more ammo... 'I don't want to be standing there holding an unloaded handgun as the threat continues'.

    Hawk also brought up interesting points. Exactly WHAT was the gun owner taught, and by whom? If he carries, which he did confirm, was he taught to shoot until the threat is no longer a threat? Did he gain valuable insight from people that were in a shootout with bipedal animals? Without a doubt every hit is not guaranteed to stop an attack, as evidenced in Jumbo's link and many police reports that I have read in the past. I certainly would not want to hear a clicking sound on an empty revolver, regardless of whether I recognized that it was empty or not.

    In the case of self defense against bipedal animals (assailants) I do not think anything is wrong with an abundance of caution in the quantities of ammo I regularly carry. I carry light- a fully loaded weapon with an additional magazine. Sometimes two. It's there if I need it. If the argument, at that point were to evolve to an argument that guns should be banned... then you are dealing with an individual whose mindset and potential future actions for our rights could be considered dangerous. Then again- you would probably root out the basis for his claims.

    I am a man of facts and hard data. It makes sense to me to carry extra ammunition (it isn't heavy to me, and if it was, it is reassuring!) and it makes even more sense when people who regularly get shot at (law enforcement or military) confirm exactly why it is a good idea. I would imagine someone who is capable of some critical thinking would reach a similar opinion, but that is giving society too much credit to assume that [capability of critical thinking]. I think he is a fool. At that time I could have relayed to him why I thought he was a fool without calling him one, but the venue was not appropriate.

    All of this is good food for thought.

    Last edited by Didnotcomply89; September 20th, 2018 at 04:34 AM.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Phoenixville, Pennsylvania
    (Chester County)
    Posts
    565
    Rep Power
    21474853

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    I once had 4 pairs of "yute" eyes staring out at me from the inside of a hoopty, as they considered stealing my parked car. I had a 380 in my pocket with 8 rounds of hyrdoshock in it and started considering if that would be anywhere near enough if things went south. Figuring the possibility of a miss or two if they all emptied out of the car and spread out, along with the stopping power of the 380, I did not feel at all comfortable with either 380 caliber or 8 rounds.
    Fortunately, the yutes decided to pick on another old man that night and no firearms were needed. Since then, I rarely carry less than my G26 or Sig 365 - 11 rounds of 9mm! When I am heading where crime is higher than usual, I up it to a G19 or G23 and maybe a spare round or two. The 380 sits in my safe.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Etters, Pennsylvania
    (York County)
    Posts
    919
    Rep Power
    1736993

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Remember, if you should fall into a deadly force situation, you will automatically default to your level
    of training. So Practice and join a club that has competent instructors to hone your skill with firearms.
    FUNDAMENTALS

    "All that is needed for Evil to Prevail is for Good Men to
    do Nothing"

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Rheems, Pennsylvania
    (Lancaster County)
    Posts
    727
    Rep Power
    21474843

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Quote Originally Posted by FUNDAMENTALS View Post
    Remember, if you should fall into a deadly force situation, you will automatically default to your lowest level
    of training. So Practice and join a club that has competent instructors to hone your skill with firearms.
    FIFY

    Una Salus Victis Nullam Sperare Salutem

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Etters, Pennsylvania
    (York County)
    Posts
    919
    Rep Power
    1736993

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Thank you for the fix.
    FUNDAMENTALS

    "All that is needed for Evil to Prevail is for Good Men to
    do Nothing"

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    nextdoor, Pennsylvania
    (Montgomery County)
    Posts
    146
    Rep Power
    17145771

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    An asshole with that mentality would probably even advocate firing a warning shot..
    I have so many toys because my wife wont let me have a girlfriend.......

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    206
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: "Anything more than five rounds and you are a problem"

    Quote Originally Posted by Didnotcomply89 View Post
    In a conversation with another gun owner today, he declared that if anyone needs more than five shots to end a threat then they have a big problem, as in the big problem is that you are incompetent, and that no one 'needs' 30 round magazines or 'assault weapons' (common sporting rifles). Your thoughts? is there truth to the statement? ignorance? I withhold my opinion until I hear some thoughts from the community. I don't mean for this to turn into a flame war. I want to gather insight from other people that I recognize at least know half of what they are talking about, at minimum.

    Thanks.
    Sometimes the best response is to roll your eyes and disregard any future statements from this bonehead.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 27th, 2009, 04:34 PM
  2. Picture Upload Problem "feature disabled"??
    By Whiskey Delta in forum General
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 9th, 2008, 03:32 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •