Pistol-packing politicians like added firepower

The Associated Press ^ | 08-04-2003

[Freemeorkillme]

.22???

I suppose there are a few vermin on the House and Senate floor.

[The KG9 Kid]

Nothing, if you're a stripper or a high school cheerleader.

I could live with the product, but that script on the slide just ruins the aesthetic value as I see it.

[c-b 1]

I used to subscribe to your method of carry, I found a solution, a snub nose .357, now I always carry a Gun.

[ASA Vet]

Do people really NEED swords?

Yes, because there can be only one.

[Shooter 2.5]

I have a friend who bought a stainless Ruger Old Army and he completely removed the warning label on the side of the barrel with no after affects. I tried to see where the barrel was out of round and it just wasn't noticable.

[cinFLA]

I suppose. I'd think that one could find a relatively flat .38, or at least, as you note, a .32.

My Sig 380 packs more firepower than a .32 and a lot of 38's.

[G L Tirebiter]

I didn't get to the end of the article. I stopped after the first graph when I read:"some even pack their guns when they saunter onto the floor of the Indiana House and Senate"

I guess that everyone carrying is some sort of preening macho man looking for a fight. Yuk.

[Centurion2000]

but imagine the response of an attacker who has his hands around your throat when you put two rounds of .22 mag in his groin.

He's going to squeeze harder and MAY die of blood loss long after he's sent you to the afterlife.

[lepton]

Do people need swords?

My point wasn't to actually question you having a sword, it was to point out how one can apply that "need" question to anything, and how ridiculous doing so is. You didn't "need" a sword, until you needed one.

[Darksheare]

I know.
And we don't 'need' guns until it's needed.
If you don't have one, then it's too late.
I personally prefer swords for close in stuff.
It doesn't make a loud noise when used and it's relatively quite when preparing to use it, no clicking or clacking of actions when readying to use it.

But realistically, it's impractical for anyone outside of armreach + blade length distance.

[ought-six]

"I dislike small caliber guns as self-defense myself, but imagine the response of an attacker who has his hands around your throat when you put two rounds of .22 mag in his groin."

A .22 to the eyeball will stop most anyone, most likely permanently (there's not much between the eye and the brain to interfere with a bullet). A .22 magnum would be especially damaging in such a case. If the perp has his hands on your throat, you are close enough to put a round in his eye. Sounds brutal, but we're talking self-defense here, and self-defense means doing whatever is necessary to save your life, or the life of a loved one.

[Darksheare]

Heck, a thumb, pen, or mechanical pencil to the eye is pretty mean, but once done you can then proceed to beat the snot out of the guy as hard as you can.

[HurkinMcGurkin]

A .22 to the eyeball will stop most anyone, most likely permanently

Yeh, I was just trying to demostrate to the poster who implied a .22 round wasn't deadly that it will get the job done at close range.

If the perp has his hands on your throat, you are close enough to put a round in his eye. Sounds brutal, but we're talking self-defense here, and self-defense means doing whatever is necessary to save your life, or the life of a loved one.

I've actually studied martial arts for several years. It does take a certain kind of person to inflict certain wounds on another person. For instance, in the same scenario, without a weapon, and nowhere to back-up to, the perp would get an open-hand jab to the throat himself if I couldn't break his grip in about one try. In fact, a "strangle hold" is a very poor assault on someone if the person being attacked has even minimal self-defense training. Unless the victim is pinned against a wall or the ground, its virtualy useless and opens the attacker up to a variety of blows.

[lepton]

Yeh, I was just trying to demostrate to the poster who implied a .22 round wasn't deadly that it will get the job done at close range.

I am well aware of its use as an assassins weapon. The problem with a .22 though, is that if it doesn't hit one of those "instantly lethal" areas, it is just a nuiscance to most. Sure the person may bleed to death later, but in the mean-time they are not likely to be debilitated in the least (though a certain percentage of people are indeed dropped by any round that hits them anywhere).

[gc4nra]

Nice!

[HurkinMcGurkin]

Sure the person may bleed to death later, but in the mean-time they are not likely to be debilitated in the least (though a certain percentage of people are indeed dropped by any round that hits them anywhere).

Possibly, but consider that many attacks are stopped by the mere brandishing of a gun. Things will happen so fast that the perp may not know how hurt he is, and may not realize that you only have a .22. If this happens to be a mugging or the like, i'd bet in 9 times out of 10, the perp flees. If this is some altercation where the person is dead-set on killing you, then I may lean towards your opinion.

[SJSAMPLE]

I regret ever selling my Ruger SP101 in .357mag. Great gun, but I had my eye on the SIG P229. Damn.

[autoresponder]

looks like my m-1877 circa 1879 Colt Lightning .38 on yer post

a favorite of Doc Holliday

[autoresponder]

But I have two

Sabres that is

One Reb

One Yank

yet there is that 148 year old swordcane from Richmond.....

[kAcknor]

 looks like my m-1877 circa 1879 Colt Lightning .38 on yer post

kAcknor Sez:

     

I'll be... It does kinda... ;)  I'll bet Doc's never had no little flag sticking out of it though... ;)

"yIQeqQo' neH, DoS yIqIp!" (Don't just aim, hit the target!)

Have you checked the *bang_list today?