- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:00 pm to UpToPar
quote:
I feel like you're just being intentionally obtuse now.
No, you just have a problem reading what is actually stated.
quote:
Again, sometimes stopping the threat requires incapacitating the attacker.
Did I say otherwise anywhere in this thread? Why do you have a problem sticking to what is actually stated instead of making up arguments that aren't being made?
quote:
So why would you not opt for a caliber that is more capable of killing an attacker in the event the only way to stop the threat is to kill them, no matter how unlikely you claim that is?
Because I actually read the OP and thought about it rather than knee-jerking a post. Your opinion on what is more capable vs what actually happens when people are shot doesn't mean a whole lot. I don't make claims on how unlikely something is, I'm telling you the actual truth which you can Google yourself. There are plenty of reasons why someone might not opt for another caliber, what's important is that they choose what they are confortable with and carry it as much as legally possible.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:33 pm to dawg23
quote:
Nothing personal, but you really seem to be big on "book learning."
I'm big on learning period. Which means I research a topic and weigh it against personal experience.
quote:
But with all that said, you're simply off-base to claim: "A threat doesn't care what you are shooting at them, they only care that they are being shot at. In that regard, .22 Mag is equal to any other firearm."
It's actually based on real world studies on the topic, so no I'm not off base on anything I have stated here.
quote:
There's a reason why you can't cite a single LE agency, or a single military unit, that routinely arms its troops with .22's.
Did I imply there was? I'm not attempting to do such a thing so it is beyond me as to why you think I was trying in the first place. Make an honest argument or don't make one at all. I've stated already that there is a huge difference between the military/govt agencies and civilians in the application of armed force. Why don't you try making an argument that doesn't put words in my mouth or attributes non-existent conclusions nobody else is making here?
quote:
that some of your "academic" arguments are being put forth to encourage people to reexamine their opinions.
I do that a lot. I challenge those that are hide-bound because that's the only way bad information is stopped from being propagated. I do that on a wide range of topics because the vast majority of people simply don't do their own homework, they just take what they are given at face value. You should try it sometime.
quote:
I'm going with "conventional wisdom" that's based on a 150 years of men stopping men with firearms.
Convention changes, or should if people would try to be more objective. It's changed with every major war in the last 200 years. Too many people wrap themselves in conventional because it's too difficult to accept new ideas or maybe accept the fact that the advice they grew up with isn't the best.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:52 pm to Clames
quote:
Because I actually read the OP and thought about it rather than knee-jerking a post.
OP asked if .22 mag was a good option for concealed carry based on the recommendation of his CC instructor.
Is it an option for some people? Yes. Is it the best option for an average male? No, far from it. I'm not sure how you honestly refute that.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:55 pm to Will Cover
I've never understood the obsession with "stopping power." in almost all situations, if someone shoots you with a .22 you are gonna have a bad time
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:05 pm to bbvdd
quote:
That is not an LCR or an LCP. I think it's a Taurus.
You're right - I fixed it with a better pic.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:19 pm to Will Cover
No, maybe a backup. But, no, no, no as primary carry.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:21 pm to Clames
quote:
weigh it against personal experience.
Which is?
quote:
It's actually based on real world studies on the topic,
Which studies are you citing?
quote:
I've stated already that there is a huge difference between the military/govt agencies and civilians in the application of armed force.
There is very little difference in LEO use of force and civilian use of force. Both relies on perceived threat of danger and stopping that threat.
Fact is although better than nothing... .22 caliber is not a caliber that should be recommended for CC.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 11:50 pm to TrebleHook
quote:Yeah, almost...
in almost all situations, if someone shoots you with a .22 you are gonna have a bad time
That time you run into the guy on bath salts with a weapon of his own, would you rather have to shoot him once? Or 4 or 5 times? You wanna give him the opportunity to put you in a bad time condition? Or stop the threat immediately?
Posted on 1/27/17 at 8:25 am to Will Cover
At a ridiculous price. That instructor is an idiot. The smallest thing you should carry is a .38 special.
Posted on 1/27/17 at 11:07 am to dawg23
quote:
flunk the shooting test
what is it hit the targets (any where on the target) 36 times? from 5-10-15? yikes. If someone cant do that then yeah prob dont need a CCL.
This post was edited on 1/27/17 at 11:11 am
Posted on 1/27/17 at 11:08 am to Will Cover
quote:
7 to 8 business days after submitting it in person at the LA State Police HQs.
still waiting on mine going on 5 days. I went into HQ as well. Did you do the online status check?
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News