Guns make people overconfident.

OP
M

Mallic

Yellow Belt
Joined
Feb 19, 2024
Messages
59
Reaction score
29
Not really: in general, punching somebody in the street is an unlawful act but self-defense makes it justified and thus not punishable (= no conviction and no jail). You definitely can throw punches if it's to defend yourself, others or, in some cases, your property. From what I know, in principle the right to self-defense is somewhat universally recognized. The biggest variable across jurisdictions is the legal reasoning to analyse the situation and determine whether that particular occurrence was self defense or not. And like with all things law, it all depends on the evidence, the lawyers and the judge.

Btw this was not a stab, I find it very interesting to hear opinions from US folks, as - as far as guns are concerned - you guys are confronted with a completely different reality than what I'm used to.
Guns honestly throw the entire balance out of whack. Guns are intimidating at first being a portable boomstick that can instantly end people with the pull of a trigger and if you dont know it's strengths and weaknesses you're gonna lock up and have no idea what to do.
 

Hot Lunch

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Apr 25, 2023
Messages
926
Reaction score
449
Very few, but I know I will.



Dude I'm gonna level with ya, If you're living in the south a good policy is to just assume everyone is carrying and act accordingly.

I live in the south, and I really hate it when other southerners act like they have a monopoly on certain things. Tells me they've never been up north.

Anyhow, the highest rates of gun ownership are in the northwest, followed by the midwest. Not the south. Hell, Texas is even ranked #27.

 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,517
Reaction score
8,181
The volume of sales is substantial.
Yeah.

I think what is going to happen is technology is going to favor the AR. And the technology is going to be important.

Eg. Smart scopes. Which are being used to counter drones.


The Australian army is starting to look at the 300 blackout. I assume for its ability to be suppressed. And looking at the sig I think. Just because it is easier to do that to ARs than it is to steyers
 

gyoja

Master Black Belt
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2024
Messages
1,074
Reaction score
641
Yeah.

I think what is going to happen is technology is going to favor the AR. And the technology is going to be important.

Eg. Smart scopes. Which are being used to counter drones.


The Australian army is starting to look at the 300 blackout. I assume for its ability to be suppressed. And looking at the sig I think. Just because it is easier to do that to ARs than it is to steyers
This is true for Western countries. The developing world and many Eastern countries will continue to use AK variants for years to come, largely due to costs.
 

GreenieMeanie

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
509
Reaction score
147
Not really: in general, punching somebody in the street is an unlawful act but self-defense makes it justified and thus not punishable (= no conviction and no jail). You definitely can throw punches if it's to defend yourself, others or, in some cases, your property. From what I know, in principle the right to self-defense is somewhat universally recognized. The biggest variable across jurisdictions is the legal reasoning to analyse the situation and determine whether that particular occurrence was self defense or not. And like with all things law, it all depends on the evidence, the lawyers and the judge.

Btw this was not a stab, I find it very interesting to hear opinions from US folks, as - as far as guns are concerned - you guys are confronted with a completely different reality than what I'm used to.
Ive heard many horror stories about the Criminal Protection Service. The UK reality is that if Im confronted with a stabbing device, Im not allowed to carry a proper weapon to defend myself with.
 

GreenieMeanie

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
509
Reaction score
147
Right, right! You know how we love to accessorize!
1713692584769.jpeg

Was this what you had in mind?
 

O'Malley

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
645
Reaction score
581
Ive heard many horror stories about the Criminal Protection Service. The UK reality is that if Im confronted with a stabbing device, Im not allowed to carry a proper weapon to defend myself with.

Not an expert on UK public security, but the idea is that nobody's allowed to walk around armed. Which means that if the bad guy gets controlled and they find the knife he was supposed to stab you with, they'll take it away from him and he'll get in legal trouble. Which makes it less likely that you'll face the knife. Which gives you less of a reason to carry.

Criminals will often use self-defense concerns to justify illegal carrying but it doesn't work. Once I've been to the trial of a guy who had had a scuffle at a bar and stabbed the other guy to death with a kitchen knife he had in his bag. He tried to explain that he carried the knife to protect himself but the judge didn't buy it, as people don't do that here and know it's illegal, so it didn't reflect well on his claims of self-defense.

And, personally, with 10 years of martial training and a long experience dealing with physical assaults, even if I were carrying I'm not sure about the chances of positive outcome if I were to engage an armed fight after being "confronted with a stabbing device".
 

Badhabits

Orange Belt
Joined
Mar 4, 2024
Messages
72
Reaction score
46
Out of curiosity, is there a connection between the people in the UK being "disarmed" and all the "practical karate", bunkai etc push that's been coming out of the UK for awhile now?
 

GreenieMeanie

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
509
Reaction score
147
Which means that if the bad guy gets controlled and they find the knife he was supposed to stab you with
Why would a criminal stick around, after stabbing someone, let alone keep the weapon.
I'm not sure about the chances of positive outcome if I were to engage an armed fight after being "confronted with a stabbing device".
You train reaction, dueling, or counter-ambushing?
 

Fungus

Blue Belt
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
278
Reaction score
170
Ive heard many horror stories about the Criminal Protection Service. The UK reality is that if Im confronted with a stabbing device, Im not allowed to carry a proper weapon to defend myself with.
The idea is that there are two paths to walk:

Allow people to armselves as much as they want (for protection), but this leads to the rearmament inflation, and more and more powerful weapons on the streets, and more tension.

The other idea is that noone should walk around with weapons, this leads to less and less weapons on the street and less tension. So whenever there is a conflict (it will happen anyway) the probability for deadly outcome is smaller.

Occasionally there are always nutcases in society, and if there are guns all over the place, these people wil do alot more damage. So the second strategy is to reduce the availability of weapons, and we don穡t think a "terror balance" is the best solution.
 

Fungus

Blue Belt
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
278
Reaction score
170
Why would a criminal stick around, after stabbing someone, let alone keep the weapon.
I think he meant that if the police makes a "routine control" of someone, before a crime is comitted but while he is planning a crime, if he is wearing weapons he will get prosecuted simply for wearing it. So those who havce concealed weapons always need to afraid of routine controls by police. In some neighbourhoos where criminmals or criminal activity is common (statistically documented), the police can in some countries have a right to control you before a crime is comitted. We see this coming also here. The purpose of this is to prevent crime, and make life for criminals difficult.
 

GreenieMeanie

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
509
Reaction score
147
The idea is that there are two paths to walk:

Allow people to armselves as much as they want (for protection), but this leads to the rearmament inflation, and more and more powerful weapons on the streets, and more tension.
This is an entirely intellectual and theoretical proposition. Even societies which are heavily armed by default, dont have this tension issue. You have a balance of power arrangement, in which no one attacks anyone outside of social violence (someone violated cultural rules). When predatory attacks do happen, they are generally carefully planned to mitigate risks.
The other idea is that noone should walk around with weapons,
People will always find a way to arm themselves, if they perceive a threat, and dont believe in the authorities ability to resolve the issue. This is well documented going back at least 1000 years.
I think he meant that if the police makes a "routine control" of someone,
Criminals use spotters to avoid those things, and if they have to, they get creative with hiding weapons.
 

Fungus

Blue Belt
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
278
Reaction score
170
dont have this tension issue. You have a balance of power arrangement, in which no one attacks anyone
That "balance of power" implies a tension by definition, as the balance is maintained by more and more force.
I don't nuke you becuase then you will nuke me and then we are both toast. Yes we may have "peace", but if something triggers the big guns the more fatal outcome. this is the "tension" or "potential" trapped.

Some think it's leads to a better society if you try to reduce the primary causes for disagreements, and not prevent the conflict by just power balancing. I would not feel safe know that everyone walks around with guns in their pockets. Me also having one would not help much.
 

GreenieMeanie

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
509
Reaction score
147
That "balance of power" implies a tension by definition, as the balance is maintained by more and more force.
I don't nuke you becuase then you will nuke me and then we are both toast. Yes we may have "peace", but if something triggers the big guns the more fatal outcome. this is the "tension" or "potential" trapped.

Some think it's leads to a better society if you try to reduce the primary causes for disagreements, and not prevent the conflict by just power balancing. I would not feel safe know that everyone walks around with guns in their pockets. Me also having one would not help much.
My point was that people who live in such societies arent afraid of each other being armed. They know that as long as they follow the rules in their culture, theyll be fine. The idea that balance is maintained through democratic discourse is an entirely middle to upper class American and European concept. That is not how the world works past the fence.
 

Fungus

Blue Belt
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
278
Reaction score
170
People will always find a way to arm themselves, if they perceive a threat, and dont believe in the authorities ability to resolve the issue. This is well documented going back at least 1000 years.
Agreed.
Criminals use spotters to avoid those things, and if they have to, they get creative with hiding weapons.
Agreed.

But does this mean we should play along and just respond with more powerful weapons? Is that leading to a good development aside from power balance?
 

Latest Discussions

Top