Armatix Smart Gun

[oldshadow]

I think firearms obviate the need for martial arts, because they allow any untrained person with a few hundred bucks to become a very effective killer. It takes time and effort to become a good martial artist, it doesn't take shit to become a gun owner. Just ask the Chinese who died in the Boxer Rebellion.

And how would all those years of work fair against an untrained or poorly trained person with a Katana or even a simple knife.

 

[ABACA]

Say gangbangers had a problem with one another and had the option to legally duel and possibly kill their opponent. Both parties agree to it, and are given a .38 special with 5 shots a piece. That would separate the guys that are talk, and would slowly kill off the ones who walked the walk. It would cut down on drive by shootings. If they missed one another with all their bullets and one ended up getting shot later, you'd probably have a good idea of who did it as well. Win/win imo

Well, we could do that, or we could decriminalize drugs, finance public schools with a mechanism other than property taxes, and implement policies to mitigate economic inequality.

But I totally get it, conservatives would rather the blacks just kill each other.

 

[Uchi Mata]

And how would all those years of work fair against an untrained or poorly trained person with a Katana or even a simple knife.

I've done a lot of knife work over the years. And why are you assuming I don't have a knife? Because I don't like guns?

 

[Scrody]

Well, we could do that, or we could decriminalize drugs, finance public schools with a mechanism other than property taxes, and implement policies to mitigate economic inequality.

But I totally get it, conservatives would rather the blacks just kill each other.

I never said anyone had to agree to it. Both parties would have to in order for it to be legal.

I like how you automatically assumed I was talking about black people. Are you sure I'm the racist here? Are black people the only gangbangers in America? That's simply asinine.

 

[oldshadow]

I've done a lot of knife work over the years. And why are you assuming I don't have a knife? Because I don't like guns?

So have I. So do you consider a knife part of martial arts?

I never assumed you didn't like or have knifes.

My statement was on how well a trained fighter would do at close quarters with a poorly trained but very hostile person with a knife.

 

[Uchi Mata]

So have I. So do you consider a knife part of martial arts?

I never assumed you didn't like or have knifes.

My statement was on how well a trained fighter would do at close quarters with a poorly trained but very hostile person with a knife.

If you get in a knife fight, chances are one or both people are going to get hurt pretty badly. I think I'd win and live (kinda the same thing), not that I wouldn't get hurt.

Knives are definitely part of the martial arts.

 

[oldshadow]

If you get in a knife fight, chances are one or both people are going to get hurt pretty badly. I think I'd win and live (kinda the same thing), not that I wouldn't get hurt.

Knives are definitely part of the martial arts.

Yes if both are armed with knifes (bold) but if you have an well trained fighter with no weapon and a poorly trained fighter with a knife how do you think the trained fighter would do?

I'm not trying to trap or bait you with this and I will give my view first.

From my experience the trained fighter will still face a situation where their chance of being seriously injured or killed will be very great.

From research and our own testing with shock knifes we found this to be true.

 

[Scrody]

I think firearms obviate the need for martial arts, because they allow any untrained person with a few hundred bucks to become a very effective killer. It takes time and effort to become a good martial artist, it doesn't take shit to become a gun owner. Just ask the Chinese who died in the Boxer Rebellion.

What if a person is too feeble or is too busy to train or has a disability that doesn't allow them to train? What about women? Guns are an equalizer for those that are otherwise incapable of defending themselves. What about senior citizens? Should the 80 year old Korean war vet duke it out with a 21 year old that boxes? Or should he just be a victim because you think matching violence with violence is too unsanitary for a society?

 

[ABACA]

I never said anyone had to agree to it. Both parties would have to in order for it to be legal.

I like how you automatically assumed I was talking about black people. Are you sure I'm the racist here? Are black people the only gangbangers in America? That's simply asinine.

Yep, let's implement a policy that vastly disproportionately affects blacks and latinos and then pretend that there is no racial component to the policy. Another typical conservative tactic.

 

[Scrody]

Yep, let's implement a policy that vastly disproportionately affects blacks and latinos and then pretend that there is no racial component to the policy. Another typical conservative tactic.

Crazy how white people are listed on there too isn't it?

 

[Uchi Mata]

What if a person is too feeble or is too busy to train or has a disability that doesn't allow them to train? What about women? Guns are an equalizer for those that are otherwise incapable of defending themselves. What about senior citizens? Should the 80 year old Korean war vet duke it out with a 21 year old that boxes? Or should he just be a victim because you think matching violence with violence is too unsanitary for a society?

Again, I don't think guns are useless or unnecessary in some circumstances. I just hate the culture that glorifies them because I think it leads to a lot of destructive behavior. I'm not a pacifist, and I don't deny the right to self defense. I do think that the paranoia, gun fetish, and power fantasies of many zealous gun advocates are harmful to society and make everyone less safe by effectively precluding any sort of political action, ever, to reduce the prevalence of guns in American society. That has nothing to do with whether an 80 year old man can own a gun for self defense.

I want to be Switzerland, where people commonly own guns but there's very little gun crime, mostly (IMO) because the culture surrounding guns is much more careful and non-confrontational.

 

[Scrody]

Again, I don't think guns are useless or unnecessary in some circumstances. I just hate the culture that glorifies them because I think it leads to a lot of destructive behavior. I'm not a pacifist, and I don't deny the right to self defense. I do think that the paranoia, gun fetish, and power fantasies of many zealous gun advocates are harmful to society and make everyone less safe by effectively precluding any sort of political action, ever, to reduce the prevalence of guns in American society. That has nothing to do with whether an 80 year old man can own a gun for self defense.

I want to be Switzerland, where people commonly own guns but there's very little gun crime, mostly (IMO) because the culture surrounding guns is much more careful and non-confrontational.

I'm not a fan of the gun culture here either, it makes every dumbass that doesn't have a legitimate reason to own one an excuse to walk down the street with an AR and challenge police officers. I would love for us to be like Switzerland, but we're not. We've always been a violent nation. Thankfully we have extensive law enforcement agencies that are designed to find these people. If I had the guarantee that my life and no one that's close to me was never going to be harmed, I would be on the same page as you. But there are no guarantees in life.

 

[HIMBOB]

Zero positive uses.

The key facet of any firearm is reliability. If a firearm isn't reliable, it's a liability. Once you introduce electronic elements to the equation, it becomes too risky.

As for Correctional Officers, most do not carry firearms. Only when transporting or when on perimeter detail. Those inside the prison usually carry pepper-spray, tazer, and/or a baton. Those transporting or on perimeter once again rely on their weapons to function 100% of the time, with little or no warning. Adding any sort of barrier to that could be fatal.

Zero positive uses when you include the presumption "it will cause issues with reliability".

If you remove that assumption and put in another, "it has zero effect on reliability" do you still see no positive use?

 

[panamaican]

Again, I don't think guns are useless or unnecessary in some circumstances. I just hate the culture that glorifies them because I think it leads to a lot of destructive behavior. I'm not a pacifist, and I don't deny the right to self defense. I do think that the paranoia, gun fetish, and power fantasies of many zealous gun advocates are harmful to society and make everyone less safe by effectively precluding any sort of political action, ever, to reduce the prevalence of guns in American society. That has nothing to do with whether an 80 year old man can own a gun for self defense.

I want to be Switzerland, where people commonly own guns but there's very little gun crime, mostly (IMO) because the culture surrounding guns is much more careful and non-confrontational.

You're blaming American gun violence on gun culture when, if anything, your real problem is with America's comfort level with violence. Switzerland has a different culture altogether, not just when it comes to guns, so of course their gun culture will reflect that.

This is a violent nation. Not just gun violent, but all violence violent. It's a country founded on the principles of fighting. Fighting for land, fighting for rights, fighting to defend others. Founded by conquest, expanded by conquest, filled with people who left one nation for the chance to fight for a better opportunity somewhere else. A restless, unsatisfied populace. Even our legal system is built on confrontation. Our favorite past time is a violent one.

And guns are just an extension of that, a symptom, not the disease. I understand where you're coming from but it's a belief system that runs contrary to the seamier side of what makes America great.

 

[HIMBOB]

If you get in a knife fight, chances are one or both people are going to get hurt pretty badly. I think I'd win and live (kinda the same thing), not that I wouldn't get hurt.

Knives are definitely part of the martial arts.

Always liked the saying "there are no professional knife fighters".

 

[HIMBOB]

What if a person is too feeble or is too busy to train or has a disability that doesn't allow them to train? What about women? Guns are an equalizer for those that are otherwise incapable of defending themselves. What about senior citizens? Should the 80 year old Korean war vet duke it out with a 21 year old that boxes? Or should he just be a victim because you think matching violence with violence is too unsanitary for a society?

On the same line of thinking.

The 21yo has a gun and the Vet has a gun,
whomever wants to take the advantage and draw/shoot his weapons first has that advantage.

Guns are offensive not defensive, they help the aggresor.

 

[Scrody]

On the same line of thinking.

The 21yo has a gun and the Vet has a gun,
whomever wants to take the advantage and draw/shoot his weapons first has that advantage.

Guns are offensive not defensive, they help the aggresor.

So anyone that shoots first immediately wins the gunfight? The best defense is a good offense.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Guns are offensive not defensive, they help the aggresor.

What are some weapons this isn't true for? Seems to me the guy who gets off first is nearly always at an advantage.

 

[ABACA]

Crazy how white people are listed on there too isn't it?

You're probably one of the people who think safety measures don't work because you can come up with an example when they wouldn't. In other words, you're probably a person who can't do math at a grade school level.

 

[Byron Carter]

edit: wrong thread