|   |   |   |   |   |   |   | 

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 289
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19

    The Distance Disease!

    Nobody can maintain correct form while exerting maximum effort-- Not in baseball throwing or batting and not in tennis service or ground strokes. Smart players of every sport MUST exert less than maximum effort in order to maintain correct form. Mickelson played like a moron.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Mickelson managed to save par at the 406-yard 6th hole despite sending his drive into the right rough and then hitting his approach only 37 yards – 43 yards away from the pin and still in the rough.

    The next tee shot ricocheted backward off a tree, seemingly a break since he had a clear line to the No. 7 green despite being in the right rough. But Mickelson pushed his approach well left into a hazard, forcing him to take a penalty on his way to double bogey. His only other birdie came on a 16-foot putt at the par-3 8th.

    “I played well the first four holes, then the last 14, I hit the ball terrible, so I’ll have some work to do,” Mickelson said. “Already was in there texting Butch (Harmon, his coach) and so I’ve got some direction. In the morning, I’ll probably get out here early.”

    Mickelson, who hit only five of 14 fairways, bogeyed two of the last three holes. And he saved par in between at No. 17 despite his approach shot hitting a television tower."
    --------------------------------------------------------------

    Larry

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Burnham and Berrow
    Posts
    3,659
    Rep Power
    20
    I am surprised that Moobs rang Harmon first when a quick call to GR's resident swing guru could have sorted all his issues.

    Lets hope he reads GR

    Edgey
    WITB Ping K15 Driver, Nike SQ Sumo 16 deg "Thragina", Ping G15 4,5 and 6 hybrid, Callaway BB2002 7-SW, Ping Nome Putter

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The easiest
    Posts
    6,334
    Rep Power
    21
    When he pulled out his 3 iron on that long par 4, forget what hole since I just got home from work and had things to do, he tried to smash a hard hook and got ahead of it leaving it in the left rough. Doesn't the guy carry a 3 wood that he could smooth-draw more reliably? His performance does not bode well for how Pebble will likely play.

    Bitten by the distance bug really screwed up my game in the '90's when I got a Killer Bee 46" driver. It took my years to learn that a center hit with less head speed than a mighty heel or toe hit at 110 will more likely result in a 2nd shot that is playable instead of drop-and-take-stroke or punch-out.

  4. #4
    Larry, you need some new material. We've been through this one before. Again, your sports analogies are lame. I've never seen a big leaguer sling a 100+ MPH fastball with 80 percent effort. Homerun hitters don't thin to themselves, "just stay smooth" singles hitter might. Golf is more counterintuitive than any other sport. Sometimes even the best players hit it like sh!t. If even his approach shots sucked, how do you attribute his sh!tty play to the dreaded "distance bug?"
    Maxfli Fire- Driver-LW
    Putter- Scotty Cameron limited edition Studio Select Newport

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    I have played baseball, tennis, and handball. Everyone understands when we see someone swing so hard that they lose control. We understand because we all lose control when we swing too hard. In baseball we strike out and in tennis we double-fault. In golf we hit it sideways-- and fail to make the cut. Duh.

    Larry

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    I have played baseball, tennis, and handball. Everyone understands when we see someone swing so hard that they lose control. We understand because we all lose control when we swing too hard. In baseball we strike out and in tennis we double-fault. In golf we hit it sideways-- and fail to make the cut. Duh.

    But when we practice, we work to hit the ball farther with our swing, so that both are all out distance and our 85% (or whatever dial back we perceive) will both be longer for the same accuracy.

    If accuracy was all that mattered, I could just tee off with a 5 iron and never miss a fairway...

    As you so eloquently put it: "Duh."
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mystic Hills, Chesapeake Run, Swan Lake, Blackthorn
    Posts
    1,722
    Rep Power
    18
    If you slammed down a few negra modelos before postin, you might loosen up a bit lar. I,ve been grippin and rippin it, and playin the best golf in years lar, so your logic is only for 99 percent of the other amateurs. These fat tires are pretty good fd
    Tm R9 420cc 9.5 Motore Tm R9 3 wood rip phenom, Titleist 909h 19* 24* voodoo, Scratch EZ-1 ds i80,steelfiber 3 or 4. 5-9 KBS, ds 47* jlm, pdg 53* ds 60* Odyssey Black 2 ball tour blade 33.5" Lethal

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mystic Hills, Chesapeake Run, Swan Lake, Blackthorn
    Posts
    1,722
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    Nobody can maintain correct form while exerting maximum effort-- Not in baseball throwing or batting and not in tennis service or ground strokes. Smart players of every sport MUST exert less than maximum effort in order to maintain correct form. Mickelson played like a moron.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Mickelson managed to save par at the 406-yard 6th hole despite sending his drive into the right rough and then hitting his approach only 37 yards – 43 yards away from the pin and still in the rough.

    The next tee shot ricocheted backward off a tree, seemingly a break since he had a clear line to the No. 7 green despite being in the right rough. But Mickelson pushed his approach well left into a hazard, forcing him to take a penalty on his way to double bogey. His only other birdie came on a 16-foot putt at the par-3 8th.

    “I played well the first four holes, then the last 14, I hit the ball terrible, so I’ll have some work to do,” Mickelson said. “Already was in there texting Butch (Harmon, his coach) and so I’ve got some direction. In the morning, I’ll probably get out here early.”

    Mickelson, who hit only five of 14 fairways, bogeyed two of the last three holes. And he saved par in between at No. 17 despite his approach shot hitting a television tower."
    --------------------------------------------------------------

    Larry
    You,ll never no what a 190 yard 5 iron into the wind feels like lar
    Tm R9 420cc 9.5 Motore Tm R9 3 wood rip phenom, Titleist 909h 19* 24* voodoo, Scratch EZ-1 ds i80,steelfiber 3 or 4. 5-9 KBS, ds 47* jlm, pdg 53* ds 60* Odyssey Black 2 ball tour blade 33.5" Lethal

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by 12sandwich
    You,ll never no what a 190 yard 5 iron into the wind feels like lar
    I doubt Larry will ever know what a 190 yard 3 wood into the wind feels like...

    ...no matter what he claims on YouTube.
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by alangbaker
    I doubt Larry will ever know what a 190 yard 3 wood into the wind feels like...

    ...no matter what he claims on YouTube.
    Alan, when are you due for a vacation?
    GR lives...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    Alan, when are you due for a vacation?
    LOL

    This is vacation for me, Lorenzo!

    Pure amusement. :-)
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by 12sandwich
    You,ll never no what a 190 yard 5 iron into the wind feels like lar
    190 is like a full 7 iron for Lefty. I don't know where he get's his distance with his irons but it's amazing.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Desert Willow
    Posts
    1,116
    Rep Power
    22
    I'll concede that when you are learning the game it is of no use to swing all out. Once you develop some strong fundamentals, especially in setup and alignment, you can basically swing all out and have no problems.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by SDB1
    I'll concede that when you are learning the game it is of no use to swing all out. Once you develop some strong fundamentals, especially in setup and alignment, you can basically swing all out and have no problems.
    There are some very good teachers who have taught that you need to learn to hit the ball hard from the outset.

    Jack Grout taught Jack Nicklaus that way and Harvey Penick said:

    "Hit it Hard

    If you start off the game hitting the ball easy, your muscles learn the slow pace. You will always lack distance."
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mystic Hills, Chesapeake Run, Swan Lake, Blackthorn
    Posts
    1,722
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by poe4soul
    190 is like a full 7 iron for Lefty. I don't know where he get's his distance with his irons but it's amazing.
    I always liked that about Lefty, he puts the mustard on his shots, the debates between his caddy are great.
    Tm R9 420cc 9.5 Motore Tm R9 3 wood rip phenom, Titleist 909h 19* 24* voodoo, Scratch EZ-1 ds i80,steelfiber 3 or 4. 5-9 KBS, ds 47* jlm, pdg 53* ds 60* Odyssey Black 2 ball tour blade 33.5" Lethal

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The easiest
    Posts
    6,334
    Rep Power
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by alangbaker
    But when we practice, we work to hit the ball farther with our swing, so that both are all out distance and our 85% (or whatever dial back we perceive) will both be longer for the same accuracy.

    If accuracy was all that mattered, I could just tee off with a 5 iron and never miss a fairway...

    As you so eloquently put it: "Duh."
    And if you dropped down to a 4 or 3 iron, hit 90% of the fairways and 70% of the greens, you could likely shoot even par with a fair to middlin' short game.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel
    And if you dropped down to a 4 or 3 iron, hit 90% of the fairways and 70% of the greens, you could likely shoot even par with a fair to middlin' short game.
    Maybe...

    Or you could just learn to hit the driver...
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    11,981
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel
    When he pulled out his 3 iron on that long par 4, forget what hole since I just got home from work and had things to do, he tried to smash a hard hook and got ahead of it leaving it in the left rough. Doesn't the guy carry a 3 wood that he could smooth-draw more reliably? His performance does not bode well for how Pebble will likely play.

    Bitten by the distance bug really screwed up my game in the '90's when I got a Killer Bee 46" driver. It took my years to learn that a center hit with less head speed than a mighty heel or toe hit at 110 will more likely result in a 2nd shot that is playable instead of drop-and-take-stroke or punch-out.
    I had an average round today but one thing I did manage was a smooth draw with a 3 wood on a short par 4. I hit it at what felt like about 80% but the result was a smoked draw down the pipe out to where I would hit it if I really went after it. I only hit one decent drive all day and that was also with a swing that felt within myself but was timed perfecftly. I have real trouble not trying to swing for the fences with driver, but next time I go out I'm going to try real hard to swing the driver at 80% and see how far it goes. I have a suspicion that the better contact and superior ball flight of a controlled swing will result in the same distance as swinging out of my shoes but with much greater accuracy and consistent distance.
    The views expressed by Not a Hacker are not meant to be understood by you primitive screw heads. Don't take it personally, just sit back and enjoy the writings of your better.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The easiest
    Posts
    6,334
    Rep Power
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by alangbaker
    Maybe...

    Or you could just learn to hit the driver...
    Learning to hit driver and knowing when to hit it are two different skills.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Didn't pelze try to tame phat phil? As I recall it worked at first and then he got pelze in the head and dropped like rock.

    Everyone has their own style of golf. His is all about risk and recovery. When he's on, he's hard to beat. I don't like the man's attitude but he's fun to watch golf. Like that shot at the masters out of the straw.

    Btw - your assuming he is swinging all out. It's hard to tell with these guys what 100% is. I would suspect that Tim Clark swings near 100% just to be able to compete and he hits many fairways. like his last drive on 18 on this years Players was cranked for his size. He practically comes out of his shoes when he swings. Honestly I just think you are projecting you novice skills and limited talent onto these very talented and highly skilled players. I don't follow tennis but I've seen many of their first servers and it doesn't seem like they're swinging at 80%.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by 12sandwich
    You,ll never no what a 190 yard 5 iron into the wind feels like lar
    this was 220 yards into the wind. 3w off a tight lie. I did exert near all-out effort and had to step over afterward (like Gary Player), but I kept the clubhead accelerating and made a divot in front of the ball. The ball went straight and hit the green.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acKD8oEJIjg

    Larry

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by poe4soul
    Didn't pelze try to tame phat phil? As I recall it worked at first and then he got pelze in the head and dropped like rock.

    Everyone has their own style of golf. His is all about risk and recovery. When he's on, he's hard to beat. I don't like the man's attitude but he's fun to watch golf. Like that shot at the masters out of the straw.

    Btw - your assuming he is swinging all out. It's hard to tell with these guys what 100% is. I would suspect that Tim Clark swings near 100% just to be able to compete and he hits many fairways. like his last drive on 18 on this years Players was cranked for his size. He practically comes out of his shoes when he swings. Honestly I just think you are projecting you novice skills and limited talent onto these very talented and highly skilled players. I don't follow tennis but I've seen many of their first servers and it doesn't seem like they're swinging at 80%.
    That's the nice thing about tennis-- we get two serves. So of course it is ok to go for it on the first serve, but it is IDIOTIC to hit the second one out. McEnroe still kids Agassi about his double fault in a Wimbledon doubles final match--when Agassi was 18 year old! Good players simply don't do that.

    Since we only get one shot in golf, smart players play every shot like was a second tennis serve--less than maximum effort. I love watching "playing lessons" on TGC when it is an older player--Hale Irwin, Alan Doyle, etc. They stand on the tee and talk about getting the ball in play--NOT about hitting it way out there. We know their names because they are smart. They win matches mostly because their opponents beat themselves. Doyle said "the fairway can be a lonely place!"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC4hgHucPY4

    Larry

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    this was 220 yards into the wind. 3w off a tight lie. I did exert near all-out effort and had to step over afterward (like Gary Player), but I kept the clubhead accelerating and made a divot in front of the ball. The ball went straight and hit the green.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acKD8oEJIjg
    1. The first time, you claimed it was 230 yards.

    2. There is quite obviously no wind in that video.

    3. You made no divot.
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by 12sandwich
    I always liked that about Lefty, he puts the mustard on his shots, the debates between his caddy are great.
    Maybe it should be equally illegal to putt croquet style--and to play opposite your natural side? Mickelson is actually right-handed--none of his friends call him "lefty" because he does everything but golf with his right hand. In fact a few years ago he tried out as a pitcher with the Padres baseball team during Spring Practice--throwing right handed. (his top speed was 70 MPH, not even fast enough for batting practice!)

    Larry

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel
    Learning to hit driver and knowing when to hit it are two different skills.
    much like learning how to use a 9mm Glock vs. learning when to use it.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    That's the nice thing about tennis-- we get two serves. So of course it is ok to go for it on the first serve, but it is IDIOTIC to hit the second one out. McEnroe still kids Agassi about his double fault in a Wimbledon doubles final match--when Agassi was 18 year old! Good players simply don't do that.
    Since the very best players in the world do double fault, that's a bit of a stupid thing to say, don't you think? And sometimes, even the very best take a risk and go for it on second serve, because they feel the risk is worth it.

    Since we only get one shot in golf, smart players play every shot like was a second tennis serve--less than maximum effort.
    Just because we don't hit it as hard as we can on the course doesn't mean that distance isn't something worth striving for, Larry.
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by alangbaker
    1. The first time, you claimed it was 230 yards.

    2. There is quite obviously no wind in that video.

    3. You made no divot.

    Obsessed nutcase stalker. Gotta be miserable living in your skin. Get help.

    Larry

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    Obsessed nutcase stalker. Gotta be miserable living in your skin. Get help.

    Larry
    What? I thought ad hominen attacks were something you abhorred, Larry.

    And I thought you promised to be "gone" if I posted a reply to you.

    Funny how you can't keep your word for even a week, isn't it?
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    That's the nice thing about tennis-- we get two serves. So of course it is ok to go for it on the first serve, but it is IDIOTIC to hit the second one out. McEnroe still kids Agassi about his double fault in a Wimbledon doubles final match--when Agassi was 18 year old! Good players simply don't do that.

    Since we only get one shot in golf, smart players play every shot like was a second tennis serve--less than maximum effort. I love watching "playing lessons" on TGC when it is an older player--Hale Irwin, Alan Doyle, etc. They stand on the tee and talk about getting the ball in play--NOT about hitting it way out there. We know their names because they are smart. They win matches mostly because their opponents beat themselves. Doyle said "the fairway can be a lonely place!"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC4hgHucPY4

    Larry
    Yah, your right that's why short straight knockers win every PGA tour event. The stats simply do not support your argument. Long hitters have won more an advantage on the tour. If they are off just a bit they are scrambling from the long grass. But when they are on they win events. Occasionally you get a short knocker that will win a few events but it's the exception not the rule.

    I'm sure if you said what you've posted here to phat phills face he would laugh or have bones push you out of the way.

    Besides the guys you've mentioned aren't on national tv playing with the tour.

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    Maybe it should be equally illegal to putt croquet style--and to play opposite your natural side? Mickelson is actually right-handed--none of his friends call him "lefty" because he does everything but golf with his right hand. In fact a few years ago he tried out as a pitcher with the Padres baseball team during Spring Practice--throwing right handed. (his top speed was 70 MPH, not even fast enough for batting practice!)

    Larry
    Maybe he was trying to throw at 80%. Maybe he thought that everything in sports is exactly like golf in every way. Was he throwing an HX Tour?
    Maxfli Fire- Driver-LW
    Putter- Scotty Cameron limited edition Studio Select Newport

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    World Woods Golf Club - Pine Barrens course
    Posts
    797
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    much like learning how to use a 9mm Glock vs. learning when to use it.
    9mm????

    ugh.

    Glock????????

    Double ugh.

    Anyone can use a Glock and the 9mm is ballistically inferior to both the .40 S&W and the .45 ACP.

    Of course it would work in a pinch, but neither a Glock nor any pistol in 9mm would be my first choice. But then I am, admittedly, HEAVILY biased toward the 1911 platform. Para Ordnance is my preference. My P14-45 is stainless steel mechanical perfection baby.
    SMT 455db 9* - Accuflex VS339 X
    Sonartec SS-03 - TT DG S400
    KZG Forged Blades 3-PW - Rifle Project X 7.0
    KZG Forged Raw 52*, 56*, 60* - Rifle Spinner 6.5
    Mizuno by Bettinardi BC1
    Titleist ProV1x
    Cash for the beer cart and a quarter to mark my ball

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_h
    9mm????

    ugh.

    Glock????????

    Double ugh.

    Anyone can use a Glock and the 9mm is ballistically inferior to both the .40 S&W and the .45 ACP.

    Of course it would work in a pinch, but neither a Glock nor any pistol in 9mm would be my first choice. But then I am, admittedly, HEAVILY biased toward the 1911 platform. Para Ordnance is my preference. My P14-45 is stainless steel mechanical perfection baby.
    1911s are wonderful pistols, great for people with the right to carry them in visible holsters, usually reinforced to handle the 3 lbs of pointless weight. :-)

    Not everybody can carry visible, and only Chewbacca could conceal a Para, and only if it was winter on Alderan and he was overdressed.

    I have minimum requirements of a pistol.

    1 it needs to send a bullet over 100 grains into a target fast enough to open up the hollowpoint. These days we're talking .38 special with Speer gold dots. +p, sure. The .38 snub will hit a target with a Speer at over 900 fps, and that combination of bullet and numbers is a reasonable man stopper. Not the .45 ACP, but also not 3 lbs worth of gun.

    Any 9mm now will get you well over 1000 fps with the right ammo. That speed will make a good bullet double in size. I've got Gold Dots in 124 grain +P for the Block, and for my Argentinian 9mm, the Bersa Thunder 9. I prefer the Bersa, as it is ambidextrous with all controls. I hate the Block. It's my wife's. She shoots it better anyway.

    2 the gun needs to go in my pocket without a lot of printing, and without a lot of weight tugging down that side of the belt and banging loudly into counters and car doors and such. A carry gun has to be carryable.

    A lightweight .38 snub with +P Speer Gold Dots is for me the ultimate carry gun. No safeties, no chamber indicators, no magazines, no scissor triggers... just pull it out and pull the trigger. And a hammerless model, Ruger LCR or the Smith versions of hammerless, are calling to me. Can't stand the hammer on my Chief's Special hooking the top of my pocket when I whup it out.

    Besides, my Chief's Special is first year, serial # 12,xxx, 1952. It came out before S&W went to numbers. It's a Model 36 before they used that designation. It's old, and it's in great shape, and I want to put it away instead of carry it around.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    World Woods Golf Club - Pine Barrens course
    Posts
    797
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    1911s are wonderful pistols, great for people with the right to carry them in visible holsters, usually reinforced to handle the 3 lbs of pointless weight. :-)

    Not everybody can carry visible, and only Chewbacca could conceal a Para, and only if it was winter on Alderan and he was overdressed.

    I have minimum requirements of a pistol.

    1 it needs to send a bullet over 100 grains into a target fast enough to open up the hollowpoint. These days we're talking .38 special with Speer gold dots. +p, sure. The .38 snub will hit a target with a Speer at over 900 fps, and that combination of bullet and numbers is a reasonable man stopper. Not the .45 ACP, but also not 3 lbs worth of gun.

    Any 9mm now will get you well over 1000 fps with the right ammo. That speed will make a good bullet double in size. I've got Gold Dots in 124 grain +P for the Block, and for my Argentinian 9mm, the Bersa Thunder 9. I prefer the Bersa, as it is ambidextrous with all controls. I hate the Block. It's my wife's. She shoots it better anyway.

    2 the gun needs to go in my pocket without a lot of printing, and without a lot of weight tugging down that side of the belt and banging loudly into counters and car doors and such. A carry gun has to be carryable.

    A lightweight .38 snub with +P Speer Gold Dots is for me the ultimate carry gun. No safeties, no chamber indicators, no magazines, no scissor triggers... just pull it out and pull the trigger. And a hammerless model, Ruger LCR or the Smith versions of hammerless, are calling to me. Can't stand the hammer on my Chief's Special hooking the top of my pocket when I whup it out.

    Besides, my Chief's Special is first year, serial # 12,xxx, 1952. It came out before S&W went to numbers. It's a Model 36 before they used that designation. It's old, and it's in great shape, and I want to put it away instead of carry it around.
    You are officially on my list of Kewl People now Dave.



    I actually like the heft of my Para. I find it helps to maintain control in an adrenalin charged situation and also helps get back on target faster because perceived recoil is lower. Plus, fully loaded it carries 14 + 1 with 2 more mags readily available. That's 43 rounds of either Federal Tactical, Speer Gold Dots or CorBons in .45 ACP 185gr JHP. Mine is jazzed up a bit. Extended / ambi controls, beaver tail,custom trigger (4 pounds), combat grips, etc. Tritium sights are coming one of these days.

    In actual practice 1911's really aren't that tough to conceal because they're flat.

    Plus I'm 6'6", 225.

    LOL

    These guys make great sh!t:

    http://www.miltsparks.com/VM-2.htm
    SMT 455db 9* - Accuflex VS339 X
    Sonartec SS-03 - TT DG S400
    KZG Forged Blades 3-PW - Rifle Project X 7.0
    KZG Forged Raw 52*, 56*, 60* - Rifle Spinner 6.5
    Mizuno by Bettinardi BC1
    Titleist ProV1x
    Cash for the beer cart and a quarter to mark my ball

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_h
    You are officially on my list of Kewl People now Dave.



    I actually like the heft of my Para. I find it helps to maintain control in an adrenalin charged situation and also helps get back on target faster because perceived recoil is lower. Plus, fully loaded it carries 14 + 1 with 2 more mags readily available. That's 43 rounds of either Federal Tactical, Speer Gold Dots or CorBons in .45 ACP 185gr JHP. Mine is jazzed up a bit. Extended / ambi controls, beaver tail,custom trigger (4 pounds), combat grips, etc. Tritium sights are coming one of these days.

    In actual practice 1911's really aren't that tough to conceal because they're flat.

    Plus I'm 6'6", 225.

    LOL
    True, they are flat, but I"m not. :-) I need a shorter grip and shorter barrel, so I can drop it in a pocket, or better still, into one of the pocket-bottom holsters that holds a snubbie butt-up for easy access.... :-)

    I figure if I ever have to use it, 5 shots should be enough to change the game.. if I need extra mags, I"m probably not trained for that firefight... I don't mind carrying a handful of extra rounds or a speedloader in a pocket but I probably won't be winning firefights against multiple assailants by rapid fire and mag changes... I'm too clumsy and goofy for that sheite.. so a revolver suits me, it's idiot-proof.. don't have to remember which gun I have, whether it's got a round in, whether it's cocked and locked or how the safety works or whether there is one... with a revolver, especially DAO revolver like the Ruger LCR, just yank it out and pull the trigger.

    I just want to be able to stop the assault, period. Some folks here remember that my wife was carjacked and murdered in 1991, and of course I have no idea if her having a gun would have saved her but it would have had to be better odds at least.. been married 17 years now, and this wife likes to shoot and is good at it. she will go down fighting. in fact, I'm glad I don't have to fight her... :-)) I just give in and that settles it.

    All that defense stuff aside, I do love to shoot. I have all sorts of .22 pistols including a Taurus 4" .22 magnum revolver... that little .22 magnum makes a HUGE boom and big flame whoosh, and out of a pistol it's about 30% faster than the .22LR .. I'm getting over 1400 fps with the Winchester Extreme 34 grain, not bad speed for a revolver ...

    got a little Walther .22 that has suppressor threads (one of these days :-), bought the wife a Smith 317 ultralite .22 revolver, 8 shots worth.. got an old Ruger Mark I .22 target pistol that I bought in a pawn shop in 1981.... got the Bersa Firestorm, a well made Argentine copy of the old Walther PPK but in .22LR... plus the Block 26, the Bersa Thunder 9mm, and the 1952 Chief's Special S&W... a nice mix of big and little, old and new...

    That Bersa Thunder is the department weapon for Argentine state police and local city police depts as well... can't beat it for quality, feel, accuracy for the money.. cost me $350 new, has never failed with any ammo...

    All your controls available for the lefty? Slide release, safety, mag release? Never saw a 1911 set up like that before. That's the beauty of the Bersa Thunder, which also comes in .45.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    11,981
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    much like learning how to use a 9mm Glock vs. learning when to use it.
    That's easy. It's when the can of pepper spray to the face has him looking at you licking his lips.
    The views expressed by Not a Hacker are not meant to be understood by you primitive screw heads. Don't take it personally, just sit back and enjoy the writings of your better.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    11,981
    Rep Power
    32
    Dave,

    In Australia law enforcement officers all have the Glock 9mm, and one good thing about them is their compact size and weight makes them easy to conceal for those not trying to look like cops. You can always tell plain clothes and surveillance law enforcement officers from the bum bag at the front of their wastes.
    The views expressed by Not a Hacker are not meant to be understood by you primitive screw heads. Don't take it personally, just sit back and enjoy the writings of your better.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    7,189
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    1911s are wonderful pistols, great for people with the right to carry them in visible holsters, usually reinforced to handle the 3 lbs of pointless weight. :-)

    Not everybody can carry visible, and only Chewbacca could conceal a Para, and only if it was winter on Alderan and he was overdressed.

    I have minimum requirements of a pistol.

    1 it needs to send a bullet over 100 grains into a target fast enough to open up the hollowpoint. These days we're talking .38 special with Speer gold dots. +p, sure. The .38 snub will hit a target with a Speer at over 900 fps, and that combination of bullet and numbers is a reasonable man stopper. Not the .45 ACP, but also not 3 lbs worth of gun.

    Any 9mm now will get you well over 1000 fps with the right ammo. That speed will make a good bullet double in size. I've got Gold Dots in 124 grain +P for the Block, and for my Argentinian 9mm, the Bersa Thunder 9. I prefer the Bersa, as it is ambidextrous with all controls. I hate the Block. It's my wife's. She shoots it better anyway.

    2 the gun needs to go in my pocket without a lot of printing, and without a lot of weight tugging down that side of the belt and banging loudly into counters and car doors and such. A carry gun has to be carryable.

    A lightweight .38 snub with +P Speer Gold Dots is for me the ultimate carry gun. No safeties, no chamber indicators, no magazines, no scissor triggers... just pull it out and pull the trigger. And a hammerless model, Ruger LCR or the Smith versions of hammerless, are calling to me. Can't stand the hammer on my Chief's Special hooking the top of my pocket when I whup it out.

    Besides, my Chief's Special is first year, serial # 12,xxx, 1952. It came out before S&W went to numbers. It's a Model 36 before they used that designation. It's old, and it's in great shape, and I want to put it away instead of carry it around.
    Ahhhhhh, . . . . . . this is what was suspected of you Tea Party members . . . . . . . . just a bunch of militia carrying guns and ready to cut down a liberal at any opportunity . . . . . . . . . . . I like it.

    Mizuno irons -- made by Hattori Hanzo, forged in the fires of Mt. Fujiyama.

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    White Point Golf Club
    Posts
    4,909
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf
    I have played baseball, tennis, and handball.
    Larry

    No wonder Spank wants to sleep with you.
    2007-2017 Moderator of the Year.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    1911s are wonderful pistols, great for people with the right to carry them in visible holsters, usually reinforced to handle the 3 lbs of pointless weight. :-)

    Not everybody can carry visible, and only Chewbacca could conceal a Para, and only if it was winter on Alderan and he was overdressed.

    I have minimum requirements of a pistol.

    1 it needs to send a bullet over 100 grains into a target fast enough to open up the hollowpoint. These days we're talking .38 special with Speer gold dots. +p, sure. The .38 snub will hit a target with a Speer at over 900 fps, and that combination of bullet and numbers is a reasonable man stopper. Not the .45 ACP, but also not 3 lbs worth of gun.

    Any 9mm now will get you well over 1000 fps with the right ammo. That speed will make a good bullet double in size. I've got Gold Dots in 124 grain +P for the Block, and for my Argentinian 9mm, the Bersa Thunder 9. I prefer the Bersa, as it is ambidextrous with all controls. I hate the Block. It's my wife's. She shoots it better anyway.

    2 the gun needs to go in my pocket without a lot of printing, and without a lot of weight tugging down that side of the belt and banging loudly into counters and car doors and such. A carry gun has to be carryable.

    A lightweight .38 snub with +P Speer Gold Dots is for me the ultimate carry gun. No safeties, no chamber indicators, no magazines, no scissor triggers... just pull it out and pull the trigger. And a hammerless model, Ruger LCR or the Smith versions of hammerless, are calling to me. Can't stand the hammer on my Chief's Special hooking the top of my pocket when I whup it out.

    Besides, my Chief's Special is first year, serial # 12,xxx, 1952. It came out before S&W went to numbers. It's a Model 36 before they used that designation. It's old, and it's in great shape, and I want to put it away instead of carry it around.

    Do you ever have a difficult time deciding which gun to bring to church?

    Does your church have a targets behind it the churchgoers can shoot at after the service?
    GR lives...

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    Do you ever have a difficult time deciding which gun to bring to church?

    Does your church have a targets behind it the churchgoers can shoot at after the service?
    don't need a gun in church. Pastor has one under the podium. :-) this was a good troll job, though.... :-)

    wacko lefties who hate God and Christians do sometimes come into churches with evil on their minds. Unlike university administrators, most churches have accepted this likelihood and are prepared for it.

    it isn't the self-defense-minded among us who cause deadly conflict. We are the ones who stop it before it gets worse.

    Lots and lots of gun crimes reported across this country every week. Number of gun crimes committed by owners with legitimate license or carry permit? So close to zero as to not even be a statistic. I can't think of any offhand, maybe the abortion doctor murderer owned his gun legally, I dunno.

    But crimes either stopped or interrupted by citizens using guns to defend themselves and their property? well I know that several times a week it's reported in local media across the country that some citizen has shot a criminal, showed a weapon that discouraged a criminal, or even engaged in a gunfight with a criminal who didn't know his victim was armed. Rapes, kidnappings, all sorts of crimes prevented by brandishing or shooting. And those are just the stories that the news biz ends up publishing. They're not really eager to do that on a larger scale, as it upsets their chosen narrative about guns. So most of the published stories are small local stories. That means lots of defense events happen that are not noted by anyone.

    The Armed Citizen blog. google it. They only republish legitimate local newspaper and TV stories about citizens defending themselves with their guns. Sometimes there's a new story every day. They do not do commentary or write anything themselves, only republish newspaper and TV stories.

    Media tries to make out that every gun death is caused by the fact that people can legally own guns. But most guns used in crimes, like the one in my wife's case, are illegally street-sold, which no law can prevent anyway. Gun laws only disarm the law-abiding, those who are not out there shooting people and committing crimes. God only knows how much crime would take place in this country if every criminal knew there was no chance his victim would be armed. But some hint of it shows in Washington DC gun crime stats, off the chart compared to Wyoming or Texas or Colorado stats. In DC the 'victim' is NEVER armed, unless he's a bodyguard to an anti-gun politician. hypocrites.

    when someone can show me any kind of stat showing any 'crime wave' by law abiding licensed permitted gun carriers, I'll re-think. But we owners just don't DO those things. If there was such a statistic available, the anti gun folks would have been using it for years.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  41. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Not a hacker
    That's easy. It's when the can of pepper spray to the face has him looking at you licking his lips.
    heh "does that come with nachos?" yeah, Glock time..
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  42. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    don't need a gun in church. Pastor has one under the podium. :-) this was a good troll job, though.... :-)

    wacko lefties who hate God and Christians do sometimes come into churches with evil on their minds. Unlike university administrators, most churches have accepted this likelihood and are prepared for it.

    it isn't the self-defense-minded among us who cause deadly conflict. We are the ones who stop it before it gets worse.

    Lots and lots of gun crimes reported across this country every week. Number of gun crimes committed by owners with legitimate license or carry permit? So close to zero as to not even be a statistic. I can't think of any offhand, maybe the abortion doctor murderer owned his gun legally, I dunno.

    But crimes either stopped or interrupted by citizens using guns to defend themselves and their property? well I know that several times a week it's reported in local media across the country that some citizen has shot a criminal, showed a weapon that discouraged a criminal, or even engaged in a gunfight with a criminal who didn't know his victim was armed. Rapes, kidnappings, all sorts of crimes prevented by brandishing or shooting. And those are just the stories that the news biz ends up publishing. They're not really eager to do that on a larger scale, as it upsets their chosen narrative about guns. So most of the published stories are small local stories. That means lots of defense events happen that are not noted by anyone.

    The Armed Citizen blog. google it. They only republish legitimate local newspaper and TV stories about citizens defending themselves with their guns. Sometimes there's a new story every day. They do not do commentary or write anything themselves, only republish newspaper and TV stories.

    Media tries to make out that every gun death is caused by the fact that people can legally own guns. But most guns used in crimes, like the one in my wife's case, are illegally street-sold, which no law can prevent anyway. Gun laws only disarm the law-abiding, those who are not out there shooting people and committing crimes. God only knows how much crime would take place in this country if every criminal knew there was no chance his victim would be armed. But some hint of it shows in Washington DC gun crime stats, off the chart compared to Wyoming or Texas or Colorado stats. In DC the 'victim' is NEVER armed, unless he's a bodyguard to an anti-gun politician. hypocrites.

    when someone can show me any kind of stat showing any 'crime wave' by law abiding licensed permitted gun carriers, I'll re-think. But we owners just don't DO those things. If there was such a statistic available, the anti gun folks would have been using it for years.
    A couple of quick questions for you if I may. Not trying to pick a fight or anything, just curious about your opinion on a couple of points.

    Firstly, let's say a criminal with his illegally acquired gun robs someone in their home. If they know that the homeowner is probably armed, I think they're far more likely to shoot them preemptively than they are if they think they're almost certainly not armed. Thoughts on that one? Basically the better armed your quarry is, the more likely you are to use lethal force.

    Secondly, gun crime stats. This list shows the gun-related murder statistics for a bunch of countries. The US is around 5 times higher than that of Canada and about 27 times higher than that of the UK, both of which have much stricter gun laws than the US. Why do you think that is?

  43. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    A couple of quick questions for you if I may. Not trying to pick a fight or anything, just curious about your opinion on a couple of points.

    Firstly, let's say a criminal with his illegally acquired gun robs someone in their home. If they know that the homeowner is probably armed, I think they're far more likely to shoot them preemptively than they are if they think they're almost certainly not armed. Thoughts on that one? Basically the better armed your quarry is, the more likely you are to use lethal force.

    Secondly, ----- The US is around 5 times higher than that of Canada and about 27 times higher than that of the UK, both of which have much stricter gun laws than the US. Why do you think that is?
    my opinion, and it's just that unless I cite statistics--

    #1 question.... most criminals aren't actually ready to just slaughter people, even if they have guns to do it. The stories (never publicized, but available if you search for them, try The Armed Citizen blog, google it) show again and again that the number one cause of an interrupted, stopped, prevented crime in progress is brandishing a gun, not actually shooting it.. so if you go by the odds, most of the time you find an intruder in your home, you can scare him out of there by showing him the gun, shouting you'll shoot, etc etc.. and in fact that's the way most of them happen. Unarmed people, though, are truly victims. Rapes happen, assaults, killings, because the elderly or female or small homeowner/resident is subject to whatever evil ideas cross the mind of the bigger stronger scary guy while he is in there and knows he has temporary control. And of course the more bad things he does, the more he thinks about killing you so you won't be able to talk about it.

    bottom line, when MOST criminals believe a homeowner is at home, armed, and likely to be encountered when you break in, most criminals will move along to a different target. That is why home break-ins and person-on-person crime are so much lower in states where people are likely to be armed. Truly, an armed society is a polite society. I'm not talking about a bunch of crazies, I'm talking about the 99.9% of calm, respectful, decent law abiding people in this society... they won't change their character just because there's a gun in their pockets or purses. Millions upon millions of Americans are armed and law abiding, and there just isn't the loony guncrime spree going on here that people think there is. And in the states where the largest number of people are armed, the person on person crime is the lowest. That stat alone should settle this.

    There are a few who are at the end of the rope, drug addicts, etc, who will do anything... and that includes shooting you if you walk in, if you see their faces, etc. So, being armed is better than not being armed, IMHO. If they'll kill me to protect themselves from my possible gun, they'll kill me to protect themselves from being identified.

    If they 'choose in advance' to shoot me on the grounds that they believe I"m armed, well then I'll do my best to shoot first.. decent training will give the homeowner advantages, as most criminals with guns really aren't that good with them... and the homeowner who is NOT armed will probably be shot by this guy just in CASE he/she is armed, on the same rationale. so, better to be armed.

    Meanwhile, being armed, and being LIKELY to be armed, will have probably prevented or stopped 90% of the crimes against me, my house and my family. And being armed DOES stop those things, every day all over America. Criminals are not suicidal, not usually. And for the ones who are, like the college campus shooters, well we cannot stop them either. They can buy illegal guns, and will if we make gun stores close down. so we should be armed well enough to cut their spree short. Professors should all be permit carriers and should be required to pass arms proficiency tests, maybe even become local law enforcement department... that would drive off a bunch of the lefties from academia!! :-) Students who are adults and licensed to carry should be permitted to do so on campus, just like they are in the street.

    The day that college campuses announce the professors and some of the students are armed and will defend themselves and their fellow students and faculty is the day we've heard the last of the 'mass school shooting'.

    Lorenzo trolled me about guns in church. I would bet, in a typical Texas church with 500 ppl in the pews on a sunday morning, there's more than one legally carried pistol in there. Church folks have noticed the tendency of nutcases to charge into a church and start shooting. I wish college folks would take the same precaution. It would save lives. Possibly a LOT of lives.

    Question #2-- why is America so much higher in gun crime than other countries?

    First, it's because we're wealthier by far. THat means more drug trade, and that means more drug dealing, and THAT means more gun crime between criminals fighting over turf. That is a HUGE percentage of gun crime right there, criminals shooting criminals. The difference, statistically, between dealer-on-dealer, crook-on-crook gun crimes and the kind of gun crimes involving ordinary Americans who carry guns is such a big difference, there are NO citations of the stat in any anti-gun argument. Nobody wants the public to know that almost all the gun crime is committed with guns sold illegally on the street, by people who are using them in the process of committing other crimes, in a life of crime.

    Needless to say, that will not stop if guns are outlawed. In fact it will INCREASE, because gun traffickers will show up in force in an America where people cannot buy them legally. Wherever there is big money crime, like drug dealing, there will be gun crime too.

    Heck, in England the new big crime thing is KNIFE crimes, and now they're talking about how to outlaw KNIVES... nowadays because the prey are unarmed, the predators can just whip out a switchblade and stick someone to take their money. What's next, cricket bats? Gonna outlaw those? Louisville Sluggers?

    Millions of Americans have and carry guns. As far as I've been able to find out, NONE of those people are home-breakers, rapists, murderers, muggers or yee hah shooting spree Columbine types. The same person who will trouble himself or herself to file paperwork, take exams and become proficient is the person who obeys the law, respects his fellow citizen, loves his country and will do the right thing. And our nation is made up of MOSTLY people like that. Giving the vast majority of decent good people the power to stand up to an armed criminal does WONDERS for reducing crime.

    Banning guns would work as well as banning drugs. In a society of wealth, where people want things, other people will always be there to provide them. It is the perverse side of 'free market economics', where the severity of the penalty for being caught only causes the price of the item to increase commensurately.

    If you remove from the stats the drug dealers killing each other, and then ADD to the big picture the number of crimes prevented or interrupted by citizens who are armed, you have an ENTIRELY different picture than the classic "america is 27 times higher gun crime than britain!" thing.

    And if you look across America you find that in the cities and states with the severest restrictions on gun ownership, you also have the highest rates of gun crime. Criminals aren't stupid, and they don't attack people who might shoot back. At least the vast majority of them don't.

    and there's the essential moral argument too...

    when you need the police in seconds, they'll be there in minutes. That is a fact. Police cannot protect me, and could not protect my wife in 1991. It is for us to protect outselves. The lefty strategy, the one they wish to force on all of us, is "submit to everything the criminal wants."

    My wife was raped. She did not know for sure at that time that the criminal was going to shoot her in the head. She may have thought during the event about how she was going to live with the horror of it. Is anyone really prepared to tell me, to have told her, to submit to all that, because having a gun is bad? Did she, and don't I, have the RIGHT TO FIGHT FOR LIFE, TO DEFEND SELF, FAMILY?

    Disarm me by government force, and you REMOVE MY RIGHT TO DEFEND MYSELF.

    This is true, because government force CANNOT GUARANTEE THE CRIMINAL WON"T HAVE A GUN.

    without that guarantee, the other half of the argument which says 'society without guns is safer', then the whole concept is invalid. Society in which law abiding citizens are disarmed but criminals are not disarmed is OBVIOUSLY not safer. Criminals are, though.

    And we can talk about other weapons, about defense with knives or clubs or hands, but in that argument you remove the equalizing power of the gun from the weak, the small, the elderly. You make them into victims when being armed actually gave them a decent chance against young, strong, evil people.

    It is not for nothing that the framers felt the need to specifically point out that 'the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'. In those days, 'a well regulated militia' meant a prepared and armed citizenry who could spring into action on short notice... not a 'standing army' under government control. The government, after all, could be tyrannical. It is the PEOPLE who make up 'a well regulated militia' in the second amendment. The people who, constitutionally, have the right to remove their government and institute a new one if that one has become tyrannical.

    Being armed, constitutionally, was not just the right to self defense against crime; it was the right to self-defense against tyrannical government. If we're paying attention, we'd realize that the act of disarming citizens is historically a prelude to oppressing them in some way they'd fight against if they were still armed. Our people are good, decent people. The total lack of a 'gun owner crime wave' proves this. If government wants us disarmed, there is something behind that desire, and it isn't good.
    Last edited by daveperkins; 05-30-2010 at 08:11 AM.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  44. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Couple of quick comments. Firstly I've never seen the wealthier argument as a reason for higher crime. Quite the opposite in fact. The highest rated country on that list was South Africa. South Africa is not a wealthy country. The poorest countries tend to have the highest crime rates. If wealth were the cause of it, why is crime in the US going down? The country is getting wealthier (with the occasional blip like at the moment) and crime is going down. Would tend to suggest that the opposite is true no?

    A tremendous job all round on derailing Leery's thread. Nice work.

    Knife crime I suspect isn't really on the rise that much in the UK, just coverage of it and besides, faced with a mugger, I'd much rather they had a knife than a gun. You can outrun a knife. Not so much a bullet.

    And if criminals are so concerned about being identified, why not stick a balaclava over your head, rather than risking a death penalty or life in prison for shooting someone? It would be nice if not being identified was their only concern because they'd almost certainly not be shooting people. When it comes down to it, if almost everyone is armed, then you need to be because criminals will think you are and take action and if they know you're not, then you painted a big target on your back. But, given the choice, I'd rather live in a country where nobody is armed and I don't need to worry about it.

  45. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    Couple of quick comments. Firstly I've never seen the wealthier argument as a reason for higher crime. Quite the opposite in fact. The highest rated country on that list was South Africa. South Africa is not a wealthy country. The poorest countries tend to have the highest crime rates. If wealth were the cause of it, why is crime in the US going down? The country is getting wealthier (with the occasional blip like at the moment) and crime is going down. Would tend to suggest that the opposite is true no?

    A tremendous job all round on derailing Leery's thread. Nice work.

    Knife crime I suspect isn't really on the rise that much in the UK, just coverage of it and besides, faced with a mugger, I'd much rather they had a knife than a gun. You can outrun a knife. Not so much a bullet.

    And if criminals are so concerned about being identified, why not stick a balaclava over your head, rather than risking a death penalty or life in prison for shooting someone? It would be nice if not being identified was their only concern because they'd almost certainly not be shooting people. When it comes down to it, if almost everyone is armed, then you need to be because criminals will think you are and take action and if they know you're not, then you painted a big target on your back. But, given the choice, I'd rather live in a country where nobody is armed and I don't need to worry about it.

    Zo gets derail credit. He trolled me, and knew very well what would happen. :-) I've already complimented him on it.

    My argument attributes the drug business here to wealth, i.e. the wealthier a country, the larger amount of drugs it consumes, and the more money is to be made from drugs. Most gun crimes in this country are between criminals, mostly with illegal guns, certainly illegal in the sense that none of the criminals has a carry permit... and most of them live in places where you can't get a permit even if you're NOT a drug dealer.

    I think this argument is self-evidently strong. I do not argue that gun crimes are lower in poorer countries because they can't afford drugs.. ... that is something I don't know about.. gun crime in poorer countries is often amplified by the widespread availability of military style arms, with drug lords keeping armies and government by military dictatorship and whatnot.. I only say that gun crimes by drug dealers, in drug deals, against other drug dealers, with illegal guns, are a large part of the statistics of American gun crime which make it seem like our gun crime is so high.

    Perhaps the better argument is more specific, stick to the drug aspect without commenting on 'wealth' and let others figure it out. I only know that drug/gun crime is the huge majority of 'gun crime' in the States, and most of it happens in cities where it's almost impossible to get or own a LEGAL gun.

    THat alone removes the argument for 'gun ban', as it wouldn't matter much to the vast majority of 'gun criminals' anyway.

    The rest of it, the break-ins, the muggings, the control crimes like rape, kidnapping, etc.. you must count the number of these which are prevented, annually, by gun owning 'victims' who fight back, or else you're not getting a clear picture of the whole thing. Take away guns from law abiding citizens and the crime stats EXPLODE due to the constant person-on-person crime no longer being prevented or interrupted by citizens with guns.

    Sure, the GUN crime stats might go down with a ban. But the citizens are NOT safer, they are LESS safe. I don't much care if the stat is 1.1% or 1.15%, all I care about is the guy standing in my living room at midnight and what I"m able to do to prevent him from maiming me or killing me, or raping my wife. I'm arthritic, slow and weak, and he has the advantage. With a gun in my hand, things are more like even.

    No leftist has ever overcome this argument-- "when you can show me you've got the guns out of the hands of the criminals, I'll hand over mine".

    Government does NOT have the force to prevent the lawless from violating just another law, a new law against guns. It only removes the guns from those who weren't going around shooting people in the first place, i.e. those following law.

    it is foolish on its face. Citizens suffer and devious politicians and journalists manipulate stats and ignore the obvious in order to demonize guns when the truth is, they are demonizing good honest decent people, the ones who wanted only to protect themselves and their families.

    "I'd rather live in a country where nobody is armed"

    Soviet Union comes to mind. North Korea. Cambodia under Pol Pot. Plenty of places in human history where nobody is armed. The removal of that freedom tends to go along with the removal of most other freedoms.

    And you can't outrun a knife if the mugger is 24 yrs old and can run 100 meters in 14 seconds. I can't do that. almost nobody can do that. And muggers tend to CHOOSE people who are at obvious disadvantages, which is most of us.

    And I don't have to outrun a bullet, only fire mine first.
    Last edited by daveperkins; 05-30-2010 at 08:29 AM.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  46. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Zo trolled me in a weak moment. He won this time, and owes all of you a beer.

    I am uncharacteristically finished with this argument. I made my case. I have my guns, have had guns for thirty years, dad has guns, wife loves to shoot, her brother is a black powder afficionado up in Wyoming, former marksman medalist in the Army, and her brother, brother in law and sister all have conceal carry permits. Wife is going out for hers this year.

    None of these people has ever shot anyone. Nobody I have ever met who has guns has ever shot anyone (except in military service, of course, and I don't KNOW about those, but it's likely). I went to a tea party in Dallas a year ago, and over ten thousand people showed up. Lots of fannie packs, and in Texas that means one thing, LOTS OF GUNS. Amazingly, with thousands of gun owners all armed in one giant 'angry mob", NOBODY WAS SHOT.

    "gun crime" is a criminal problem, not a gun problem. Guns thwart a LOT of crimes. An unarmed populace is lambs to slaughter, as DC and Chicago and other parts of America have learned. And an armed populace prevents far more crimes than it causes.

    /end rant
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  47. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    Zo gets derail credit. He trolled me, and knew very well what would happen. :-) I've already complimented him on it.

    My argument attributes the drug business here to wealth, i.e. the wealthier a country, the larger amount of drugs it consumes, and the more money is to be made from drugs. Most gun crimes in this country are between criminals, mostly with illegal guns, certainly illegal in the sense that none of the criminals has a carry permit... and most of them live in places where you can't get a permit even if you're NOT a drug dealer.

    I think this argument is self-evidently strong. I do not argue that gun crimes are lower in poorer countries because they can't afford drugs.. ... that is something I don't know about.. gun crime in poorer countries is often amplified by the widespread availability of military style arms, with drug lords keeping armies and government by military dictatorship and whatnot.. I only say that gun crimes by drug dealers, in drug deals, against other drug dealers, with illegal guns, are a large part of the statistics of American gun crime which make it seem like our gun crime is so high.

    Perhaps the better argument is more specific, stick to the drug aspect without commenting on 'wealth' and let others figure it out. I only know that drug/gun crime is the huge majority of 'gun crime' in the States, and most of it happens in cities where it's almost impossible to get or own a LEGAL gun.

    THat alone removes the argument for 'gun ban', as it wouldn't matter much to the vast majority of 'gun criminals' anyway.

    The rest of it, the break-ins, the muggings, the control crimes like rape, kidnapping, etc.. you must count the number of these which are prevented, annually, by gun owning 'victims' who fight back, or else you're not getting a clear picture of the whole thing. Take away guns from law abiding citizens and the crime stats EXPLODE due to the constant person-on-person crime no longer being prevented or interrupted by citizens with guns.

    Sure, the GUN crime stats might go down with a ban. But the citizens are NOT safer, they are LESS safe. I don't much care if the stat is 1.1% or 1.15%, all I care about is the guy standing in my living room at midnight and what I"m able to do to prevent him from maiming me or killing me, or raping my wife. I'm arthritic, slow and weak, and he has the advantage. With a gun in my hand, things are more like even.

    No leftist has ever overcome this argument-- "when you can show me you've got the guns out of the hands of the criminals, I'll hand over mine".

    Government does NOT have the force to prevent the lawless from violating just another law, a new law against guns. It only removes the guns from those who weren't going around shooting people in the first place, i.e. those following law.

    it is foolish on its face. Citizens suffer and devious politicians and journalists manipulate stats and ignore the obvious in order to demonize guns when the truth is, they are demonizing good honest decent people, the ones who wanted only to protect themselves and their families.

    "I'd rather live in a country where nobody is armed"

    Soviet Union comes to mind. North Korea. Cambodia under Pol Pot. Plenty of places in human history where nobody is armed. The removal of that freedom tends to go along with the removal of most other freedoms.

    And you can't outrun a knife if the mugger is 24 yrs old and can run 100 meters in 14 seconds. I can't do that. almost nobody can do that. And muggers tend to CHOOSE people who are at obvious disadvantages, which is most of us.

    And I don't have to outrun a bullet, only fire mine first.
    I don't think you need a hand gun in this situation. I would rather have a shot gun for home protection. Most people would run when they hear the sound of a round being loaded into a pump shotgun.

    My father, who grew up in Detroit, supported gun ownership because he said the cops there were crocked. If they were the only ones to own guns he felt they would be out of control.

    Doesn't canada and the uk have gun ownership just not handguns? Ie shotguns and sport rifles. In my mind it's not about gun ownership but what kinds of guns you can own. Personally I think I should have the right to own any arms including rocket launchers, mines, and even a bomb. It's my constitutional right. Isn't it? If hand guns make me safer in my home then you could imagine how safe I would be with these weapons.

  48. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by poe4soul
    I don't think you need a hand gun in this situation. I would rather have a shot gun for home protection. Most people would run when they hear the sound of a round being loaded into a pump shotgun.

    My father, who grew up in Detroit, supported gun ownership because he said the cops there were crocked. If they were the only ones to own guns he felt they would be out of control.

    Doesn't canada and the uk have gun ownership just not handguns? Ie shotguns and sport rifles. In my mind it's not about gun ownership but what kinds of guns you can own. Personally I think I should have the right to own any arms including rocket launchers, mines, and even a bomb. It's my constitutional right. Isn't it? If hand guns make me safer in my home then you could imagine how safe I would be with these weapons.
    straw man. :-)

    nobody argues for the right to own anti-aircraft guns, mortar tubes, anti tank missiles or warheads of any kind. A genuine argument for the virtues of self defense (the only kind of argument I make) admits the foolishness of trying to use a shoulder fired launcher to defend against a mugging or a B&E. It's a diversion from the real argument about the right to keep and bear arms.

    Your father was right about crooked cops, and the federal cops in DC are no less crooked. But even honest cops say there is less crime when citizens are armed. Cops have been protected by armed citizens on numerous occasions. Cop shooters having to look at a crowd to be sure they won't be shot from THAT direction will be less enthusiastic about shooting at cops.

    the police CHIEFS, being politicians, argue for disarming the public. But the street cops like it. Because they know that most people are the good guys.

    Canada had the 'long gun registry', a national database of people who owned rifles and shotguns. They spent $2 billion on it, and accomplished nothing. No decrease in crime, no change in statistics. Just billions wasted. Not to mention the private database was given to anti gun activists and others for political reasons. People's ADDRESSES. ugly stuff. Government cannot be trusted with stuff like this. I don't mind government finding out if I tried to buy a missile launcher, but it's none of their business whether I own a pistol.

    There's a reason the second amendment was passed. Even then, framers knew that disarming the public was a well known tactic of tyrants. How can citizens raise a 'well regulated militia' if they have no access to arms? Simple enough to put it in there in our founding document.. and they even put it in specific terms "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be INFRINGED"... contextually, they admit the right of free people to have weapons before government even BEGINS. It is NOT a right granted by our government. it is a right INHERENT for human beings living in freedom, and government (which comes along AFTER our humanity and freedom is established and declared) is specifically forbidden from REMOVING that pre-existing right.

    nobody seems to notice government has NOT granted citizens the right to have weapons.. it has acknowledged that we already had that right, and it has promised not to abrogate it. Some rights are "the rights of men", not of citizens of the USA. The constitution was written specifically to make sure our own government did not stomp all over the rights of its citizens.

    Pot stirrer. :-)
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  49. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Thou doth protest way, way, way, way too much.
    GR lives...

  50. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    Thou doth protest way, way, way, way too much.
    I think it was Goldwater who said "moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue, and extremism in defense of liberty is no vice".

    Besides, your Shakespearean utterance is, contextually, an admonition that a character's loud insistence on his innocence is often indicative of his guilt. I thus fail to see the relevance. I'm making an argument for a position on an issue. Guilt or innocence does not apply.

    Of course, you could be a barbarian who doesn't know this came from Shakespeare, in which case you're just complaining that I talk too much. That would, as always, be true.

    But you trolled me. GR knows. They blame you. :-)
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  51. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    There's something about the mind of a serial rationalizer that fascinates me.
    GR lives...

  52. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    There's something about the mind of a serial rationalizer that fascinates me.

    still puzzled about the previous Shakespearean implication of some vague sort of guilt.

    But to this point--

    Bill Clinton was a genius at this technique. After stonewalling for weeks on an accusation, he'd come out and say "that's old news, it's already been dealt with" and the press would go along with him and write stories about how the accusation had already been dealt with. only they never were.

    You have now presumed my arguments for a position on an issue have been debunked, and are developing a description of a person who rationalizes debunked arguments. Fine, except my arguments aren't even CLOSE to debunked.

    In spite of the way you've treated me lately, Lorenzo, I still like you.

    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  53. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    "The thing about needing to have the last word is, it confirms the weakness of your argument and the insecurity of your position."

    - Will Rogers

    I like you too, Dave. If I didn't, I would have used the "H" word.
    GR lives...

  54. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    "The thing about needing to have the last word is, it confirms the weakness of your argument and the insecurity of your position."

    - Will Rogers

    I like you too, Dave. If I didn't, I would have used the "H" word.
    you, and Will Rogers, are implying that I NEED to have the last word. Isn't it equally plausible that I just HAPPEN to have it? Unless, of course, you post again. But you can't and still retain your credibility, not after this Rogers quote.

    I WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    you thought you had me. heh.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  55. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Are you kidding? I can always post again, knowing you'll follow or you'll expire.

    I needn't demand my position is right, my audience is intelligent and can form their own opinions. So I yield the last word to those that unilaterally claim righteousness and victory, trapped by their own manipulation and the lack of value they place on others' opinions.
    GR lives...

  56. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    Are you kidding? I can always post again, knowing you'll follow or you'll expire.

    I needn't demand my position is right, my audience is intelligent and can form their own opinions. So I yield the last word to those that unilaterally claim righteousness and victory, trapped by their own manipulation and the lack of value they place on others' opinions.
    I'm still waiting for anyone to step up and actually debunk the arguments. all the claiming and value and manipulation and unilateralism, I might well resort to some of those cool things if pressed, but nobody's even TRIED to debunk the arguments.

    the psych eval is appreciated, A for effort, you are clearly a man of deep empathy... but, ah, how 'bout a token effort at the debunk... I'll put on the straight jacket IF you succeed.. :-)
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  57. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    What I'm saying is your arguments aren't sound on their face and that it's apparent to those that read them. And also that if they disagree with me on that point, I can accept that. And that I won't pretend sheer volume and sequence by themselves can bludgeon a thinking person into thinking like me. That sort of approach eventually discredits oneself as it evolves first into an insistence and then a demand that they be right.
    GR lives...

  58. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    What I'm saying is your arguments aren't sound on their face and that it's apparent to those that read them. .
    yes, that is what I am saying you are saying...

    you are declaring my arguments debunked without having done the (obviously difficult) work of debunking them.

    Perhaps if you started with one small section of debunking. Having accomplished that, and you may choose the section, then your confidence might grow and you could tackle a couple of other sections.

    Or you can continue to declare the work done without doing it. Clinton approves. :-)
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  59. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    yes, that is what I am saying you are saying...

    you are declaring my arguments debunked without having done the (obviously difficult) work of debunking them.

    Perhaps if you started with one small section of debunking. Having accomplished that, and you may choose the section, then your confidence might grow and you could tackle a couple of other sections.

    Or you can continue to declare the work done without doing it. Clinton approves. :-)
    You're confusing difficult with unnecessary. In any event, after the above post, I rest my case. No better proof could exist.
    GR lives...

  60. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    After the above post, I rest my case. No better proof could exist.
    well, ONE better proof that I"m wrong could exist, but it clearly won't be you that posts it. :-)

    Maybe someone else will rise to the occasion and debunk my actual arguments.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  61. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    well, ONE better proof that I"m wrong could exist, but it clearly won't be you that posts it. :-)

    Maybe someone else will rise to the occasion and debunk my actual arguments.
    They can if they want to, but you've already done it yourself.
    GR lives...

  62. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    They can if they want to, but you've already done it yourself.
    again with the discussing of the debunking without the debunking.. oy vey...

    now it was ME that did it, alrighty then.. but one thing is clear, YOU haven't done it.. :-))

    wow, from your faux Shakespeare to here might be a new GR record of back-n-forth.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  63. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mystic Hills, Chesapeake Run, Swan Lake, Blackthorn
    Posts
    1,722
    Rep Power
    18
    [QUOTE=poe4soul]I don't think you need a hand gun in this situation. I would rather have a shot gun for home protection. Most people would run when they hear the sound of a round being loaded into a pump shotgun.

    Remington 870 supermag 12 gauge goose gun, with a slug barrel, non glare black finish, not a step from my bed, is my weapon of choice. I,ve seen these things frozen in the bottom of a boat. Thaw them out and your good to go.
    Tm R9 420cc 9.5 Motore Tm R9 3 wood rip phenom, Titleist 909h 19* 24* voodoo, Scratch EZ-1 ds i80,steelfiber 3 or 4. 5-9 KBS, ds 47* jlm, pdg 53* ds 60* Odyssey Black 2 ball tour blade 33.5" Lethal

  64. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    again with the discussing of the debunking without the debunking.. oy vey...

    now it was ME that did it, alrighty then.. but one thing is clear, YOU haven't done it.. :-))

    wow, from your faux Shakespeare to here might be a new GR record of back-n-forth.
    It's a well established concept. For instance, when a court reviews a matter its free to allow the case to be tried, or it can declare the matter decided without argument if the case is invalid on its face or farcical. That's what I'm doing, resting further judgement on the backs of others with nothing else required.

    The other thing is, when one finds they're dealing with someone willing to engage in an intellectual debate, debate can be worthwhile. However, when someone twists, manipulates and is open to any technique to obscure the other's opinion, and continuously claim righteousness, it's pointless. This is either apparent to others or it isn't.

    You habitually demand to be right and don't allow for disagreement. And the trappings are all there. Bible and guns don't necessarily prove this, but they do often seem to associate.
    GR lives...

  65. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    It's a well established concept. For instance, when a court reviews a matter its free to allow the case to be tried, or it can declare the matter decided without argument if the case is invalid on its face or farcical. That's what I'm doing, resting further judgement on the backs of others with nothing else required.

    The other thing is, when one finds they're dealing with someone willing to engage in an intellectual debate, debate can be worthwhile. However, when someone twists, manipulates and is open to any technique to obscure the other's opinion, and continuously claim righteousness, it's pointless. This is either apparent to others or it isn't.

    You habitually demand to be right and don't allow for disagreement. And the trappings are all there. Bible and guns don't necessarily prove this, but they do often seem to associate.
    'demanding to be right' is nonsensical. one is either right or wrong. I've been proved wrong before, but not today, not yet. Been told I'm wrong a bunch of ways.

    identify, please, the twisting and manipulating. You are convinced of my regular use of it. Just show it to me and all those others to whom it is not apparent. Show me an instance of my having made an argument that is false on its face by twisting or manipulating anything. You could even show the obscuring of another's opinion, if you like. Just show something. I admire your intellect, but you're not USING it here.

    Or you could just say I'm bitter and clinging to my guns and religion. Not like I haven't heard it before. :-)

    cut and paste, please. you can even italicize my twisting/manipulating/obscuring...
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  66. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    7,189
    Rep Power
    23
    I don't know, I may have to give this round to Lorenzo because he always posted 3 paragraphs or less and I was able to read them without trying to jump forward and read the end.
    Mizuno irons -- made by Hattori Hanzo, forged in the fires of Mt. Fujiyama.

  67. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    'demanding to be right' is nonsensical. one is either right or wrong. I've been proved wrong before, but not today, not yet. Been told I'm wrong a bunch of ways.

    identify, please, the twisting and manipulating. You are convinced of my regular use of it. Just show it to me and all those others to whom it is not apparent. Show me an instance of my having made an argument that is false on its face by twisting or manipulating anything. You could even show the obscuring of another's opinion, if you like. Just show something. I admire your intellect, but you're not USING it here.

    Or you could just say I'm bitter and clinging to my guns and religion. Not like I haven't heard it before. :-)

    cut and paste, please. you can even italicize my twisting/manipulating/obscuring...
    It's called respecting other people's ability to read and comprehend for themselves and then respecting their opinion. But if I must, here you go. Practically every post of yours has another example.
    GR lives...

  68. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    It's called respecting other people's ability to read and comprehend for themselves and then respecting their opinion. But if I must, here you go. Practically every post of yours has another example.
    First you say my arguments are implausible on their face. That avoids discussing the arguments themselves. (Which you still have not done, but I no longer expect it).

    Now you say I am disrespecting other people's opinions and their reading comprehension? I don't get it. I make arguments in issues, informed and comprehensive (overwritten and blowhard), and that adds up to disrespect of others? Why can't others respond with their own strong and passionate (and even overwrought) arguments? What holds them back? How am I disrespecting anyone?

    I suggest you are at odds with my views in the base case, and that position colors your judgment of my arguments. You begin by presuming there is something wrong with me, because sensible thinking people cannot favor the positions I do. The bibles/guns thing was my first clue. Perhaps you've previously been alarmed at others who share my beliefs and are less able to articulate them. The 'scary redneck' thing, I suppose.

    But then you search for non-rational causes for the arguments I present, to discount them by attributing my zeal and commitment to some psychosis or other. And you do not deal with the arguments. you NEVER deal with them.

    You could disprove this by presenting a case I've made and showing with your own argument that I am wrong. I would welcome it. Been proved wrong before. Learning experiences. Good stuff.

    But the psychoanalysis thing is frankly a copout. If you're offended, so be it. Reality. I write stuff because I feel like it, not to belittle or offend or disrespect anyone ELSE. I write in a way to sharpen up my own thoughts and presentations. It helps me. If you don't like it, don't read it. But reading it and then claiming it is debunked or debunks itself is just weak. You're better than that.

    And don't troll me and expect me not to bite. :-) you started all this with your guns in church. (edit-- I mean you started the thing between me and you, not the guns thing, which was already under way) Which was, btw, disrespectful and confrontational, but I gave you benefit of doubt as I always do.

    I responded with marshaled arguments in favor of constitutional rights, and you call that disrespecting people.

    Zo, you're a funny and clever guy. But you're being rubbed the wrong way by me and I do not intend it and do not accept responsibility for intending it. Your perceptions are your own.

    If you don't like my writing style, reading is not mandatory.

    If you don't like me, well I'm probably not gonna change. But that would be a shame. Even though I have a bible and some guns, I still like you. I know, hard to believe, we're all so narrow minded and mean and we all hate people from california. But still.

    EDIT--

    I won't erase any of the above. I wrote it. I still mean it. But I regret the level of aggressiveness I have shown toward Zo in this thread. I really do believe in my own arguments, else I wouldn't write them. And I really don't believe I disrespect anyone in any deliberate way. Truly, though, I am not a diplomat and do not always predict well how other people will feel about things I say. I think I'm saying "two plus two equals four", irrefutable common-sense stuff, and the other person is hearing "you are so STUPID!" from me. I can see how that would happen. I suspect if there was a way for me to avoid it in advance I'd have learned it by now. My 90 year old father in law said to me on Wednesday that in his long life and career in law, he'd never seen anyone 'convinced' to change their minds on religion and politics by an argument. It just gets people's backs up, he said, and makes 'em dig their heels in. Wisdom.
    Last edited by daveperkins; 05-30-2010 at 07:11 PM.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  69. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by SoonerBS
    I don't know, I may have to give this round to Lorenzo because he always posted 3 paragraphs or less and I was able to read them without trying to jump forward and read the end.
    Hey, I'm with you. I jump to the end of my own posts.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  70. #70
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Dave,

    For what it's worth, I think you've been pretty reasonable and level-headed through all of what is quite a contentious topic. But anyway, I digress (and I suspect in a way that won't win me favour on this site).

    I heard a story about a bar in Texas. Someone came in brandishing a gun, marched up to the bar and pointed it at the barman and ordered him to empty the register. Supposedly, when the police got there, they found the guy dead on the floor with bullets from something like 8 different guns in him. It's kind of a cool story and I have no idea if it's true or not, but the guy probably got what was coming to him. But, I struggle to believe that this is a "good" thing. I don't like the idea of the people taking the law into their own hands. Thing is that you never know what the backstory is. For example, suppose in this case that the guy who came in the bar had his wife kidnapped and the kidnappers made him do that or they'd kill his wife. Does the guy deserve to die? I don't think so. And, the fact that all those people were legally armed prevented him from ever getting the chance to demonstrate that in a court of law. Something which I believe is protected by the constitution.

    You may argue that the good that is done by people being armed, outweighs the occasional mistake or accident or what have you (and there are some of those - case in point: 3 year old shooting death), but I know that the British legal system at least is based on the idea that it is better to have 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent man convicted. Hence the high burden of proof in criminal trials. I suspect the same is true here.

  71. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Yes, your highlighted text is the basis for my approach here. There's no real debate possible with these kinds of topics, it's merely an argument. So I thought we were having an argument GR style for it's own sake. Kind of an argument about arguing. You have your view of how one has an argument and I have mine. And if we can manage to distill our argument down to the point where it's about nothing other than argument itself, then in some sense it's the purest form of argument.

    We almost got it that far, but not quite. I have many goals in life, some large, some small.
    GR lives...

  72. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    Dave,

    For what it's worth, I think you've been pretty reasonable and level-headed through all of what is quite a contentious topic. But anyway, I digress (and I suspect in a way that won't win me favour on this site).

    I heard a story about a bar in Texas. Someone came in brandishing a gun, marched up to the bar and pointed it at the barman and ordered him to empty the register. Supposedly, when the police got there, they found the guy dead on the floor with bullets from something like 8 different guns in him. It's kind of a cool story and I have no idea if it's true or not, but the guy probably got what was coming to him. But, I struggle to believe that this is a "good" thing. I don't like the idea of the people taking the law into their own hands. Thing is that you never know what the backstory is. For example, suppose in this case that the guy who came in the bar had his wife kidnapped and the kidnappers made him do that or they'd kill his wife. Does the guy deserve to die? I don't think so. And, the fact that all those people were legally armed prevented him from ever getting the chance to demonstrate that in a court of law. Something which I believe is protected by the constitution.

    You may argue that the good that is done by people being armed, outweighs the occasional mistake or accident or what have you (and there are some of those - case in point: 3 year old shooting death), but I know that the British legal system at least is based on the idea that it is better to have 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent man convicted. Hence the high burden of proof in criminal trials. I suspect the same is true here.
    Ty

    First, thank you.

    I have not heard that story and I suspect it's either apocryphal or so old as to be inapplicable to our situation. It has its charm, though, that's for sure.

    I go to your hypothetical situation now-- sure, the robber deserves a trial before a jury of his peers in this America, the best rendering thus far of all of history's imperfect societies. But he has brandished a gun and demanded money in front of witnesses. What if he instead was raping a woman in the next room and the customers in the bar heard it and went and caught him in the act? How long does a citizen who can STOP something have to wait until he acts to stop it? Do criminals have a right to continue committing their crime until they are sent to court for it? Do citizens have a RESPONSIBILITY here?

    or, in the case of this robbery, must a citizen risk his own life by trying to stop a robber WITHOUT shooting him, when the robber has a gun and appears willing to use it? Does an armed citizen ever have a clear and certain responsibility to use his weapon?

    People who are trained and licensed to carry a weapon generally are not inclined toward the sort of excess your story describes. They all know the courts are slightly biased against them, and that in any use of their weapon they will have to go to great lengths to justify every moment of their actions (just as police also must do when they use theirs). I read articles regularly in which the user of a licensed weapon trying to stop a crime against himself or others winds up in jail because he made a bad choice along the way, under stress, in seconds. It is a risk just to have a weapon in your pocket. The whole thing is a trade off. Be a victim, or be a defender who will then be subjected to enormous scrutiny by the law. And sometimes one winds up killing a man, which is an awful thing to live with even under the clearest of moral certainty.

    The left seems to have this vague, gassy idea of a wild west scenario in which guns are added to an already volatile mix of alcohol and arguments, and the bodies will just pile up in the streets. And if they don't believe that, they certainly want the public to believe it.

    Well, the fact is that millions of people in America already have guns in their pockets and that just is not happening. Most gun crime is a part of other crime and between criminals. And again, the areas of the US with the most armed citizens are the areas with the least crime. Most muggers don't work in Cheyenne or Lubbock. A guy could get shot trying to mug someone there. And most gun crimes take place in towns vastly unlike Cheyenne or Lubbock. Armed citizens does not add up to increased gun crime, not in the extensive real world experience we already have.

    But the bottom line for me comes down to an individual right. We do not live in a collective ant farm. We are all individuals with our own lives who make our own decisions. I am not required by my government to submit and be a victim for whoever comes along and wants to commit a crime against me. The "state" simply CANNOT protect me or mine. I prefer to take the extra responsibility of owning a firearm and trade those inherent risks for the risk of being forced to be a victim in an imperfect society. It is not outside the law to defend yourself, it is merely a part of the events which the law will then sort out, AFTER the fact, as it always does.

    Bad people do bad things. Always have, always will. Every person must decide whether they will prepare for it, and how much preparation they will undertake.

    Thanks again, Ty.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  73. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    11,981
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by lorenzoinoc
    Yes, your highlighted text is the basis for my approach here. There's no real debate possible with these kinds of topics, it's merely an argument. So I thought we were having an argument GR style for it's own sake. Kind of an argument about arguing. You have your view of how one has an argument and I have mine. And if we can manage to distill our argument down to the point where it's about nothing other than argument itself, then in some sense it's the purest form of argument.

    We almost got it that far, but not quite. I have many goals in life, some large, some small.
    Have you ever heard The Argument Sketch?
    The views expressed by Not a Hacker are not meant to be understood by you primitive screw heads. Don't take it personally, just sit back and enjoy the writings of your better.

  74. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Not a hacker
    Have you ever heard The Argument Sketch?
    No I haven't.

    Yes you have.

    No I haven't.

    Time's up. Good day.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  75. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Location, Location.
    Posts
    11,935
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Not a hacker
    Have you ever heard The Argument Sketch?
    Bullseye.....Now bring me a shrubbery.
    GR lives...

  76. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mystic Hills, Chesapeake Run, Swan Lake, Blackthorn
    Posts
    1,722
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    Ty

    First, thank you.

    I have not heard that story and I suspect it's either apocryphal or so old as to be inapplicable to our situation. It has its charm, though, that's for sure.

    I go to your hypothetical situation now-- sure, the robber deserves a trial before a jury of his peers in this America, the best rendering thus far of all of history's imperfect societies. But he has brandished a gun and demanded money in front of witnesses. What if he instead was raping a woman in the next room and the customers in the bar heard it and went and caught him in the act? How long does a citizen who can STOP something have to wait until he acts to stop it? Do criminals have a right to continue committing their crime until they are sent to court for it? Do citizens have a RESPONSIBILITY here?

    or, in the case of this robbery, must a citizen risk his own life by trying to stop a robber WITHOUT shooting him, when the robber has a gun and appears willing to use it? Does an armed citizen ever have a clear and certain responsibility to use his weapon?

    People who are trained and licensed to carry a weapon generally are not inclined toward the sort of excess your story describes. They all know the courts are slightly biased against them, and that in any use of their weapon they will have to go to great lengths to justify every moment of their actions (just as police also must do when they use theirs). I read articles regularly in which the user of a licensed weapon trying to stop a crime against himself or others winds up in jail because he made a bad choice along the way, under stress, in seconds. It is a risk just to have a weapon in your pocket. The whole thing is a trade off. Be a victim, or be a defender who will then be subjected to enormous scrutiny by the law. And sometimes one winds up killing a man, which is an awful thing to live with even under the clearest of moral certainty.

    The left seems to have this vague, gassy idea of a wild west scenario in which guns are added to an already volatile mix of alcohol and arguments, and the bodies will just pile up in the streets. And if they don't believe that, they certainly want the public to believe it.

    Well, the fact is that millions of people in America already have guns in their pockets and that just is not happening. Most gun crime is a part of other crime and between criminals. And again, the areas of the US with the most armed citizens are the areas with the least crime. Most muggers don't work in Cheyenne or Lubbock. A guy could get shot trying to mug someone there. And most gun crimes take place in towns vastly unlike Cheyenne or Lubbock. Armed citizens does not add up to increased gun crime, not in the extensive real world experience we already have.

    But the bottom line for me comes down to an individual right. We do not live in a collective ant farm. We are all individuals with our own lives who make our own decisions. I am not required by my government to submit and be a victim for whoever comes along and wants to commit a crime against me. The "state" simply CANNOT protect me or mine. I prefer to take the extra responsibility of owning a firearm and trade those inherent risks for the risk of being forced to be a victim in an imperfect society. It is not outside the law to defend yourself, it is merely a part of the events which the law will then sort out, AFTER the fact, as it always does.

    Bad people do bad things. Always have, always will. Every person must decide whether they will prepare for it, and how much preparation they will undertake.

    Thanks again, Ty.
    The easy access to guns is the main problem, some people have no reason to own a gun. There either mentally unstable or incopetent, and a risk to those around. I believe a test of mental stability would go a long way. I have had a 44 brandished in my shop. A glock pointed at my truck by a nutcase part time cop. A friend, a vietnam veteran, that survived two tours as point man, only to be shot by a drunken doped up ex navy seals 45. A few years ago a guy leaves a bank, the bank teller runs out after him yelling stop, stop, a good summaritan armed pulls his gun and shoots the deaf guy, that left his licsense at the tellers counter. I have one nutcase customer, always has a bible in the backseat and a pistol under the front. I have a concealed carry permit, one of the negatives, I dont like the way police treat me, and my family if I,m pulled over for a minor traffic infraction. Some supposed good people do bad things Dave
    Tm R9 420cc 9.5 Motore Tm R9 3 wood rip phenom, Titleist 909h 19* 24* voodoo, Scratch EZ-1 ds i80,steelfiber 3 or 4. 5-9 KBS, ds 47* jlm, pdg 53* ds 60* Odyssey Black 2 ball tour blade 33.5" Lethal

  77. #77
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lindenwood
    Posts
    447
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    don't need a gun in church. Pastor has one under the podium. :-) this was a good troll job, though.... :-)

    wacko lefties who hate God and Christians do sometimes come into churches with evil on their minds. Unlike university administrators, most churches have accepted this likelihood and are prepared for it.

    it isn't the self-defense-minded among us who cause deadly conflict. We are the ones who stop it before it gets worse.

    Lots and lots of gun crimes reported across this country every week. Number of gun crimes committed by owners with legitimate license or carry permit? So close to zero as to not even be a statistic. I can't think of any offhand, maybe the abortion doctor murderer owned his gun legally, I dunno.

    But crimes either stopped or interrupted by citizens using guns to defend themselves and their property? well I know that several times a week it's reported in local media across the country that some citizen has shot a criminal, showed a weapon that discouraged a criminal, or even engaged in a gunfight with a criminal who didn't know his victim was armed. Rapes, kidnappings, all sorts of crimes prevented by brandishing or shooting. And those are just the stories that the news biz ends up publishing. They're not really eager to do that on a larger scale, as it upsets their chosen narrative about guns. So most of the published stories are small local stories. That means lots of defense events happen that are not noted by anyone.

    The Armed Citizen blog. google it. They only republish legitimate local newspaper and TV stories about citizens defending themselves with their guns. Sometimes there's a new story every day. They do not do commentary or write anything themselves, only republish newspaper and TV stories.

    Media tries to make out that every gun death is caused by the fact that people can legally own guns. But most guns used in crimes, like the one in my wife's case, are illegally street-sold, which no law can prevent anyway. Gun laws only disarm the law-abiding, those who are not out there shooting people and committing crimes. God only knows how much crime would take place in this country if every criminal knew there was no chance his victim would be armed. But some hint of it shows in Washington DC gun crime stats, off the chart compared to Wyoming or Texas or Colorado stats. In DC the 'victim' is NEVER armed, unless he's a bodyguard to an anti-gun politician. hypocrites.

    when someone can show me any kind of stat showing any 'crime wave' by law abiding licensed permitted gun carriers, I'll re-think. But we owners just don't DO those things. If there was such a statistic available, the anti gun folks would have been using it for years.
    FYI, not everyone who doesn't believe in christianity is a whacko. Usually, they're just sensible. I think there's something odd about praising a god who will send you to hell if you don't 'believe'. Sounds like a scam, huh?
    Index: 10.4

    Current Sticks
    Driver - Taylor R7 425 9.5* w/ Fuji Fit-on E 370
    Titleist 904F 15* w/Graphite Design YS-6 Stiff
    Ping Eye2 - 3-PW
    TM RAC TP 52* 08 GW
    Hogan 53* 09 GW (gets sand use only now)
    Titleist SM6004 60*
    Titleist Newport 2
    Bridgestone B330 / e6

  78. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by 12sandwich
    The easy access to guns is the main problem, some people have no reason to own a gun. There either mentally unstable or incompetent, and a risk to those around. I believe a test of mental stability would go a long way. I have had a 44 brandished in my shop. A glock pointed at my truck by a nutcase part time cop. A friend, a vietnam veteran, that survived two tours as point man, only to be shot by a drunken doped up ex navy seals 45. A few years ago a guy leaves a bank, the bank teller runs out after him yelling stop, stop, a good summaritan armed pulls his gun and shoots the deaf guy, that left his licsense at the tellers counter. I have one nutcase customer, always has a bible in the backseat and a pistol under the front. I have a concealed carry permit, one of the negatives, I dont like the way police treat me, and my family if I,m pulled over for a minor traffic infraction. Some supposed good people do bad things Dave
    And people kill other people, through negligence, anger and other reasons, in car accidents every day. Ban cars? Test for competence, sure. But we already do that for cars and still people demonstrate incompetence in them every day, costing others their lives. Good people do bad things, always, as do bad people. To disarm me in order to prevent a few bad deeds by others is, in my selfish opinion, unfair. Not to mention it's impossible to disarm bad guys, because they ignore the law in the first place and will simply ignore that one too.

    Guns are very much like cars, only self-defense is far more fundamental a right than transportation. Both are dangerous, both should be competence-tested, but to ban ownership of either is totalitarian and extreme.

    And historically, the disarming of the public has almost always led to a totalitarian state in which almost all rights vanish eventually, 'for the good of the state'. For some states it's a slower process, but so far it's pretty consistent.

    Glad you have a permit. Responsible armed citizens are a good thing, and corrupt cops are one of many good reasons to have one.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  79. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    World Woods Golf Club - Pine Barrens course
    Posts
    797
    Rep Power
    23
    Dave......

    You're thoughts and arguments have been laid out both eloquently and with a level head. Considering the level of personal emotion you must have attached to the subject, you deserve a great deal of respect from everybody here, regardless of their own feelings on the subject.

    For me, owning firearms is a decision not made lightly. I have tremendous respect for them and their destructive, life changing potential. I also am a USAF veteran with multiple marksmanship awards and substantial training. I CHOOSE to accept the responsibility because I prefer to have more than a passing say in my own existence and that of my family. I refuse to be a victim when I don't have to be. If, god forbid, I am ever faced with a situation that warrants the application of deadly force, that option is available to me and I am prepared both physically and mentally to take that course of action should it be the one of last resort.

    One thing that has not been brought up in thise discourse is that, for people who elect not to carry or possess firearms, you don't have to. There is no requirement in the U.S. that every household must have a gun. How you choose to address the safety of yourself and your loved ones is completely up to you within the limits of your local laws. And that is how it should be. Whether you want to believe it or not, my owning or carrying a weapon does not put you and yours at risk. In fact, it makes you safer.
    SMT 455db 9* - Accuflex VS339 X
    Sonartec SS-03 - TT DG S400
    KZG Forged Blades 3-PW - Rifle Project X 7.0
    KZG Forged Raw 52*, 56*, 60* - Rifle Spinner 6.5
    Mizuno by Bettinardi BC1
    Titleist ProV1x
    Cash for the beer cart and a quarter to mark my ball

  80. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_h
    Dave......

    You're thoughts and arguments have been laid out both eloquently and with a level head. Considering the level of personal emotion you must have attached to the subject, you deserve a great deal of respect from everybody here, regardless of their own feelings on the subject.

    For me, owning firearms is a decision not made lightly. I have tremendous respect for them and their destructive, life changing potential. I also am a USAF veteran with multiple marksmanship awards and substantial training. I CHOOSE to accept the responsibility because I prefer to have more than a passing say in my own existence and that of my family. I refuse to be a victim when I don't have to be. If, god forbid, I am ever faced with a situation that warrants the application of deadly force, that option is available to me and I am prepared both physically and mentally to take that course of action should it be the one of last resort.

    One thing that has not been brought up in thise discourse is that, for people who elect not to carry or possess firearms, you don't have to. There is no requirement in the U.S. that every household must have a gun. How you choose to address the safety of yourself and your loved ones is completely up to you within the limits of your local laws. And that is how it should be. Whether you want to believe it or not, my owning or carrying a weapon does not put you and yours at risk. In fact, it makes you safer.
    Thank you for your service Jeff, and it can't be said any better than this.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  81. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    World Woods Golf Club - Pine Barrens course
    Posts
    797
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    Thank you for your service Jeff, and it can't be said any better than this.
    Thanks dude.

    And I can't believe that I misused "you're" in the first word of the first sentence of my post. What a jackass I am! LOL!
    SMT 455db 9* - Accuflex VS339 X
    Sonartec SS-03 - TT DG S400
    KZG Forged Blades 3-PW - Rifle Project X 7.0
    KZG Forged Raw 52*, 56*, 60* - Rifle Spinner 6.5
    Mizuno by Bettinardi BC1
    Titleist ProV1x
    Cash for the beer cart and a quarter to mark my ball

  82. #82
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_h
    Thanks dude.

    And I can't believe that I misused "you're" in the first word of the first sentence of my post. What a jackass I am! LOL!
    no worries. standards are lower for 1911 guys.

    ;-)
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  83. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    World Woods Golf Club - Pine Barrens course
    Posts
    797
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    no worries. standards are lower for 1911 guys.

    ;-)
    Maybe.

    But groups are tighter.

    SMT 455db 9* - Accuflex VS339 X
    Sonartec SS-03 - TT DG S400
    KZG Forged Blades 3-PW - Rifle Project X 7.0
    KZG Forged Raw 52*, 56*, 60* - Rifle Spinner 6.5
    Mizuno by Bettinardi BC1
    Titleist ProV1x
    Cash for the beer cart and a quarter to mark my ball

  84. #84
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_h
    Maybe.

    But groups are tighter.

    you could probably outshoot me with one eye tied behind your back. :-)
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  85. #85
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by daveperkins
    you could probably outshoot me with one eye tied behind your back. :-)
    That would hurt

  86. #86
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_h
    One thing that has not been brought up in thise discourse is that, for people who elect not to carry or possess firearms, you don't have to. There is no requirement in the U.S. that every household must have a gun. How you choose to address the safety of yourself and your loved ones is completely up to you within the limits of your local laws. And that is how it should be. Whether you want to believe it or not, my owning or carrying a weapon does not put you and yours at risk. In fact, it makes you safer.
    Respectfully, I don't agree. At least with some of this. I agree that people don't have to carry or possess firearms. But, I'm not worried about me shooting me. I'm worried about someone else doing so. Be that a licensed carrier or a mugger or anyone else. I'd much rather that a mugger thinks I'm unarmed than thinks that I'm armed. I think (and it is only my opinion) that they are less likely to shoot me if they're not worried about me being armed.

    For example, suppose someone tries to mug you. They pull a knife, march up to you and tell you to empty your pockets. You start with the pocket that has the gun in it and point it at him. He runs off. I would imagine, under those circumstances you wouldn't shoot him in the back. Later that evening, after he's shaken off the adrenalin and changed his underwear he goes out to mug someone else. That someone else happens to be me. This time, rather than just threatening me and waiting for me to empty my pockets, he just sticks the knife in as I walk past and then empties my pockets himself. You're all well and happy because you thwarted a potential mugging and scared off some low life. He's happy, because my pockets probably supplied enough to cover his drug addict and his cleaning bill. Fcuking sucks to be me though.

  87. #87
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Desert Willow
    Posts
    1,116
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    Respectfully, I don't agree. At least with some of this. I agree that people don't have to carry or possess firearms. But, I'm not worried about me shooting me. I'm worried about someone else doing so. Be that a licensed carrier or a mugger or anyone else. I'd much rather that a mugger thinks I'm unarmed than thinks that I'm armed. I think (and it is only my opinion) that they are less likely to shoot me if they're not worried about me being armed.

    For example, suppose someone tries to mug you. They pull a knife, march up to you and tell you to empty your pockets. You start with the pocket that has the gun in it and point it at him. He runs off. I would imagine, under those circumstances you wouldn't shoot him in the back. Later that evening, after he's shaken off the adrenalin and changed his underwear he goes out to mug someone else. That someone else happens to be me. This time, rather than just threatening me and waiting for me to empty my pockets, he just sticks the knife in as I walk past and then empties my pockets himself. You're all well and happy because you thwarted a potential mugging and scared off some low life. He's happy, because my pockets probably supplied enough to cover his drug addict and his cleaning bill. Fcuking sucks to be me though.
    It sounds to me as if you are advocating shooting people in the back as they run away! It seems the most logical solution to your hypothetical problem!

  88. #88
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by SDB1
    It sounds to me as if you are advocating shooting people in the back as they run away! It seems the most logical solution to your hypothetical problem!
    No. If he did that, then, for a start, he may find himself in some trouble with the law and we don't want that and besides, then other potential muggers hear about it and now all of them stab/shoot first and worry about guns later. Neither situation is a good one. I don't expect Jeff will agree with me on this one, but I'd rather he lost his wallet and phone to the mugger and so did I. That would be preferable to me being stabbed or shot. For me at least.

  89. #89
    This thread has got woefully off topic. I would like to address Larry's initial assertion that nobody can do anything at maximim effort and retain form. To that all I can say is Bupkis. There are plenty of golfers who really go at the ball and still hit it straight. The best example would probably be a young John Daly who lived by the ethos 'grip it and rip it'. Rory McElroy doesn't leave a real lot in reserve either and his form is textbook right through the swing to his perfectly balanced finish (btw he also posts perfectly too Larry). From my own personal experience I can tell you that anyone with any natural athletic ability can swing a golf club as hard or as soft (which is actually harder than hitting all out) and keep perfect form.

    Larry, your second comment about the current Masters champion was an obvious flame job as nobody could be so clueless as to really think this so I won't comment.

  90. #90
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by mr natural
    This thread has got woefully off topic. I would like to address Larry's initial assertion that nobody can do anything at maximim effort and retain form. To that all I can say is Bupkis. There are plenty of golfers who really go at the ball and still hit it straight. The best example would probably be a young John Daly who lived by the ethos 'grip it and rip it'. Rory McElroy doesn't leave a real lot in reserve either and his form is textbook right through the swing to his perfectly balanced finish (btw he also posts perfectly too Larry). From my own personal experience I can tell you that anyone with any natural athletic ability can swing a golf club as hard or as soft (which is actually harder than hitting all out) and keep perfect form.

    Larry, your second comment about the current Masters champion was an obvious flame job as nobody could be so clueless as to really think this so I won't comment.
    The whole thing is a flame job. Hence the particularly find derailment effort.

  91. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    Respectfully, I don't agree. At least with some of this. I agree that people don't have to carry or possess firearms. But, I'm not worried about me shooting me. I'm worried about someone else doing so. Be that a licensed carrier or a mugger or anyone else. I'd much rather that a mugger thinks I'm unarmed than thinks that I'm armed. I think (and it is only my opinion) that they are less likely to shoot me if they're not worried about me being armed.

    For example, suppose someone tries to mug you. They pull a knife, march up to you and tell you to empty your pockets. You start with the pocket that has the gun in it and point it at him. He runs off. I would imagine, under those circumstances you wouldn't shoot him in the back. Later that evening, after he's shaken off the adrenalin and changed his underwear he goes out to mug someone else. That someone else happens to be me. This time, rather than just threatening me and waiting for me to empty my pockets, he just sticks the knife in as I walk past and then empties my pockets himself. You're all well and happy because you thwarted a potential mugging and scared off some low life. He's happy, because my pockets probably supplied enough to cover his drug addict and his cleaning bill. Fcuking sucks to be me though.
    Ty,

    Muggers and other such low lives do what they do because they think they can get away with it. If they were faced with the fact that everyone they accosted was likely to be armed, they'd be less likely to do it. Could your hypothetical situation happen on occasion? Yeah... ...I suppose it could. But in the larger picture, knowing that people in a community were likely to be armed would almost certainly lower the rate of muggings.

    And if I were the first guy, and my hand came out of my pocket with a gun, I wouldn't be waiting for the mugger to turn and run. He'd already be shot in the chest (centre of mass). He wouldn't be running anywhere.
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  92. #92
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by alangbaker
    Ty,

    Muggers and other such low lives do what they do because they think they can get away with it. If they were faced with the fact that everyone they accosted was likely to be armed, they'd be less likely to do it. Could your hypothetical situation happen on occasion? Yeah... ...I suppose it could. But in the larger picture, knowing that people in a community were likely to be armed would almost certainly lower the rate of muggings.

    And if I were the first guy, and my hand came out of my pocket with a gun, I wouldn't be waiting for the mugger to turn and run. He'd already be shot in the chest (centre of mass). He wouldn't be running anywhere.
    It may lower the rate of muggings, but I suspect that more of them would end badly for the muggee. And your shooting one just means the rest are more likely to be armed. Then they're more likely to shoot you and rob you than just to try to rob you. Everyone loses.

  93. #93
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    It may lower the rate of muggings, but I suspect that more of them would end badly for the muggee. And your shooting one just means the rest are more likely to be armed. Then they're more likely to shoot you and rob you than just to try to rob you. Everyone loses.
    Sorry, but I think you're completely ignoring basic human psychology and games theory.

    Muggers mug because they think they can get something with very little chance of risk to themselves. Change that balance in favour of greater risk to the mugger, and there will be fewer muggings.

    Muggers aren't going to say: "Hmmm... people are arming themselves, so I'd better get a gun". They're going to say: "People are arming themselves, so I'd better find another line of work. This one just got too dangerous."
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  94. #94
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    15
    I think you underestimate the desperation of some people. I don't think people get into mugging because it's easy. It's already extremely risky.

  95. #95
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ty_Webb
    I think you underestimate the desperation of some people. I don't think people get into mugging because it's easy. It's already extremely risky.
    Not immediately risky. You don't here about many muggers getting killed or seriously hurt while committing a mugging in comparison to the number of muggings there are.

    Even the risks of jail are too far off and intellectual. Faced with the risk of dying any time they come up to a potential victime... ..that's not what they bargained for.
    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  96. #96
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Masters
    Posts
    2,602
    Rep Power
    19
    A gun kept in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a member of the household, or friend, than an intruder.(Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay. "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm Related Deaths in the Home." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 314, no. 24, June 1986, pp. 1557-60.)
    This statistic bothers me the most. I am a bit conflicted on the overall topic of gun control. I wouldn't mind keeping a gun in the house to prevent intruder invasion, but it would have to be locked up for kids safety...but does having a gun locked up kind of defeat the purpose in some instances.

    I definitely don't mind people having guns for hunting purposes. I could be persuaded either way on certain types of hand guns (revolvers probably being less likely to be used for mass killings)...though, I don't like the idea of people walking around with concealed weapons, because someone could misread a situation, someone could be having an off day, or someone could just have an accident ala Plaxico Burress. I don't have any use for the public having access to automatic or assault weapons.

    I believe in the old saying guns don't kill people, people kill people...but guns make it easier to kill people or commit suicide...or both in one spree.
    The views expressed by The Purist do not necessarily represent the views of The Purist. Any posts by the Purist should not be relied upon for truth or accuracy, and should be viewed at your own risk.

  97. #97
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bear Creek DFW
    Posts
    3,741
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by The Purist
    I definitely don't mind people having guns for hunting purposes. I could be persuaded either way on certain types of hand guns (revolvers probably being less likely to be used for mass killings)...though, I don't like the idea of people walking around with concealed weapons, because someone could misread a situation, someone could be having an off day, or someone could just have an accident ala Plaxico Burress. I don't have any use for the public having access to automatic or assault weapons..
    You can also walk into a McDonalds or a mall with an illegal gun or two (which govt cannot prevent people from having) and kill as many people as you want, UNTIL someone else who is also armed shoots you to stop you from doing it.

    when you need police in seconds, they'll be there in minutes.

    It's no coincidence that Hasan opened fire on a military base where everyone who works there is FORBIDDEN from carrying weapons! You don't open fire on a roomful of ARMED PEOPLE, nobody does. Not even crazy people. Even Hasan knew he'd be killed eventually, which is what he wanted (didn't get it, hah), but he also wanted to kill as many as he could before that happened. Shooting unarmed people is, of course, the way to achieve this. College campuses, HELLO.

    There is one exception, and that is 'suicide by cop', but that won't apply to citizens with concealed weapons, as nobody knows who is armed and who is not. Suicide by armed citizen, as such, would be too 'iffy' for the genuinely suicidal.

    But opening fire on a bunch of innocents would also become iffy, if some of them are armed. That would discourage such behavior, not all of it but some.

    But I care less about whether we have four or six mall shootings a year (there will always be such things, bad ppl do bad things) than about the fact that people are attacked and assaulted every day, everywhere, large and small scale, and everyone has the right to defend themselves. You also have the right to choose NOT to, as has been pointed out. The Armed Citizen blog. An aggregator of daily 'self defense with guns' stories from across America. It happens LITERALLY every day. Horrors like mall and campus shootings are rare, but I"ll wager the would-be victims of these daily crimes around the country add up to FAR more people than the victims of any mall or college shootings in any given year. It's big news when that stuff happens, and NEVER big news when people defend themselves against daily ordinary crime.

    'guns for hunting'

    that isn't why the constitution deliberately forbids government from infringing on the right to own and carry firearms. It is so that citizens can, individually or together, oppose bad things rather than submit to them. 'well regulated militia' means group of citizens who are practiced, rehearsed, ready to become an army and deploy to defend themselves, including against their own tyrannical govt. if necessary.

    Hunting just doesn't enter into the constitutional argument.

    And what is an 'assault weapon'? a rifle is a rifle, whether it's made of black plastic or wood, 12" or 22" barrel. The only thing I can think of when people talk about 'assault' weapons is automatic weapons, which are certainly not arguable for self defense, unless your assailant is a SEAL team or something. :-) A rifle is a rifle, short barrel or long, semi-auto or bolt action, wooden or plastic, large magazine or small magazine. If a rifle having 30 rd mags is 'scarier' than one with 10 rd mags, we're focusing on the wrong thing. You can't really hit anything by firing 30 rounds in five seconds. I've tried. It's WORSE than a machine gun. At least machine guns are predictable in their recoil behavior when on full auto, largely because they fire lower power rounds to keep the heat down. A rapid fire rifle like an AK, chambered in 7.65x39, bucks like a bronc, can't aim, can't control. it LOOKS scary to have a black rifle with a banana mag hanging off the bottom, but you can do as much or more harm with less menacing-looking weapons. I'd rather have two Glock 19 pistols in my hands than one AK47 with 30 rds. Silly to ban because of appearance. They all do the same thing.

    'assault weapons' is an arbitrary term used to make people afraid of guns without really thinking about what it means. Shooting someone IS assaulting them. A single shot .22 is an assault weapon if you assault someone with it. The issue, as always, is whether such an assault is JUSTIFIED, not whether the rifle is wood or plastic or black or brown.

    Your worries about someone misreading a situation or Plaxico having an accident or someone going crazy are legitimate worries, but GOVERNMENT CANNOT DO ANYTHING PREVENTATIVE ABOUT THEM.

    some people will always be armed. A desire for something will always be met with a seller of that thing, in this country or anywhere else. The higher the penalty for being caught with something, the higher the price for it on the black market. But it will be sold, and bought, and carried, and used. Always. My question is not 'how can we be sure the nation is disarmed?' it is 'what do I do, for myself and my own family, about the immutable fact that some bad guys are armed?'

    There are tens of millions of guns in the country NOW, and government will NEVER get a grip on this. I do not want to live in a country that is CAPABLE of being certain that no citizen is armed. That is totalitarianism with capital T. Unreasonable search and seizure, detention without cause, search without warrant, they'd be doing ALL those things if they were actually trying to disarm everyone. And just banning guns without doing the seizure thing is totally useless, as the guns are still out there. And, because government CANNOT tell me that nobody planning on assaulting me is armed, how can government in any kind of CONSCIENCE then tell me that I'm not ALLOWED to be armed?

    I just want to be free to do the right thing, knowing as we all know that some people will exercise freedom to do the wrong thing. Police are there mostly to sort out what someone has already done. TOO LATE.
    Cleveland long clubs
    Adams Idea Pro irons
    Vokey and Cleveland wedges

  98. #98
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    World Woods Golf Club - Pine Barrens course
    Posts
    797
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by The Purist
    This statistic bothers me the most. I am a bit conflicted on the overall topic of gun control. I wouldn't mind keeping a gun in the house to prevent intruder invasion, but it would have to be locked up for kids safety...but does having a gun locked up kind of defeat the purpose in some instances.

    I definitely don't mind people having guns for hunting purposes. I could be persuaded either way on certain types of hand guns (revolvers probably being less likely to be used for mass killings)...though, I don't like the idea of people walking around with concealed weapons, because someone could misread a situation, someone could be having an off day, or someone could just have an accident ala Plaxico Burress. I don't have any use for the public having access to automatic or assault weapons.

    I believe in the old saying guns don't kill people, people kill people...but guns make it easier to kill people or commit suicide...or both in one spree.
    Sorry, but that study is regarded as being quite flawed in its statistics.

    Here's a few snippets:


    Fact: Of the 43 deaths reported in this flawed study, 37 (86%) were suicides. Other deaths involved criminal activity between the family members (drug deals gone bad).1

    Fact: Of the remaining deaths, the deceased family members include felons, drug dealers, violent spouses committing assault, and other criminals.2

    Fact: Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator.3 This means you are much more likely to prevent a crime without bloodshed than hurt a family member.

    1: Arthur L. Kellerman, Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home, 314 New Eng. J. Med. 1557-60 1986. Kellerman admits that his study did “not include cases in which burglars or intruders are wounded or frightened away by the use or display of a firearm.” He also admitted his study did not look at situations in which intruders “purposely avoided a home known to be armed.” This is a classic case of a “study” conducted to achieve a desired result. In his critique of this “study”, Gary Kleck notes that the estimation of gun ownership rates were “inaccurate” , and that the total population came from a non-random selection of only two cities.

    2: Ibid

    3: Dr. Gary Kleck, “Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America.” New York: Aldine de Gruyter. 1991

    More:

    http://www.gunmyths.com/
    SMT 455db 9* - Accuflex VS339 X
    Sonartec SS-03 - TT DG S400
    KZG Forged Blades 3-PW - Rifle Project X 7.0
    KZG Forged Raw 52*, 56*, 60* - Rifle Spinner 6.5
    Mizuno by Bettinardi BC1
    Titleist ProV1x
    Cash for the beer cart and a quarter to mark my ball

  99. #99
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Livin' the dream at the SPCC
    Posts
    8,511
    Rep Power
    27
    Dave, that's way too long to read. I understand the argument for guns and private citizen protection. I just don't like the fact that conflict resolution turns into gun violence or the fact that poor neighborhoods are held hostage by armed gangs. I know many people pick and choose which people they care about, and ghetto-dwellers aren't at the top of many lists, but it's a problem played out nightly on your local news channel. Drive by's, gang-related shootings and their collateral damage, etc. aren't discouraged by law-abiding citizens carrying guns.
    fred3 antagonizer
    2010 recipiant of TRG Commendation of Excellence
    Member GR Club 5K
    Member GFF Crew

    *Plus many more accolades that are the cause of jealousy

  100. #100
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Spyglass
    Posts
    11,184
    Rep Power
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by alangbaker
    Sorry, but I think you're completely ignoring basic human psychology and games theory.

    Muggers mug because they think they can get something with very little chance of risk to themselves. Change that balance in favour of greater risk to the mugger, and there will be fewer muggings.

    Muggers aren't going to say: "Hmmm... people are arming themselves, so I'd better get a gun". They're going to say: "People are arming themselves, so I'd better find another line of work. This one just got too dangerous."
    I think someone mentioned it before but most people that mug, rob, steal, etc. are addicted to drugs or alcohol. Armed civilians won't deter a meth addict from breaking into a home or from mugging people. I'm totally in favor of people's rights to own guns but it should be pointed out that carrying a gun around puts you at much greater risk of getting killed. You think a mugger is going to give you time to fight back or reach into your pocket? You don't think they are anticipating that you might fight back? What, you're going to carry a gun around in your sweatshirt pocket? Only a matter of time before you have an accident. What's the chance of getting mugged anyway?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Some help with distance ?
    By maxfli55 in forum Golf Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-26-2009, 02:08 PM
  2. Need more distance...
    By XgolfaddictX in forum Golf Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-03-2006, 01:14 PM
  3. Distance:
    By kipyego in forum Golf Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-14-2006, 06:26 PM
  4. Need more distance...
    By AJSx2 in forum Golf Discussion
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 07-14-2005, 06:01 AM
  5. No distance
    By robal97 in forum Golf Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-09-2004, 03:15 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
  •