Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Spucketts

  • Rank
    Paulding Com member

Previous Fields

  • Place of Residence
    South Paulding

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. First off, in posts back to me you've said I was foolish and now crazy. If you have an opposing view fine, present your opinions and statistics as I welcome the debate and the education. However resorting to the use of such terms turns the discussion into the equivalency of debating a 3 year old. I had two different neighbors in Smyrna get home invaded, one in an adjacent apartment building and one on my floor just across the hall. I heard it happen and loaded my 12 gauge but due to the way the door opened, I couldn't get a view of the other door not without stepping into the breezeway and presenting myself as a target, handgun or shotgun, it made no difference. Home invasions happen in the wink of an eye, you have a split second to find your weapon, define the target and discharge a round. I still think I have a greater chance of at least hitting a target if I throw a handful of stones vs throwing one stone. A solid miss with a bullet is a 100% miss while a miss with a shot blast may still result in a partial hit. No you may not drop a drug crazed crook in his tracks but a pellet to the eye or throat or even to muscle tissue may be enough to give you time to fire another round. If you have statistics that indicate otherwise I would appreciate seeing them.
  2. To do what? You're talking like the mission is to pop out of the philodendra looking like Rambo and drop the perp in his tracks. What homeowners want is for the criminal to stop what their doing and leave. Nobody wants to live with having killed someone even if it is a crook.
  3. What am I "trying to do"? I'm simply stating that for the average homeowner, who has minimal training, who spends almost no time at a gun range or maybe hunts a little, has zero training in a real world scenario where a perp or two or more is come at them, they would have a greater chance of scaring off or at least hitting the perp(s) with a scatter gun vs any other type weapon. You personally might be able to draw and shoot like Marshal Dillon but not Joe Average and not someone sitting in their first gun training course.
  4. Snake shot disperses but a fraction of what a 12 gauge round carries. As for aiming, someone's coming at you in the dark covering 20 feet or so at a quick pace, you aren't going to have time to place your bead or your reddot square on their chest, you're going to point and shoot and a scatter gun'll let you be off a bit. As for shot spreading, a single pellet won't penetrate a wall, at least not with any energy left. Even a straight line shotgun blast will dissipate energy going through a sheet rock wall. A handgun shot with the right type round will go through not only the near wall but the far wall. As for taking the shotgun from me, my home defense plan doesn't allow anyone to get that close.
  5. I happen to think a short barreled 12 gauge is the perfect home defense weapon because it allows for a greater margin of error, especially in the dark, with a fast moving target and in the hands of a homeowner who's heart is pumping 100 miles an hour. First off, a bullet is about > < that in diameter while a blast from a short barreled shotgun loaded with birdshot is going to be about the diameter of a computer screen or greater. Secondly the action of a pump shotgun puts two hands in better position to handle recoil so that additional shots can be taken on target, you don't need to aim carefully, just get close. With a hand gun you need to recover from recoil, re-aim, and there ain't no "near" about it. Third, the most powerful handgun I can handle is useless to my wife however we can both work the shotgun. Fourth, if someone's already in your bedroom the chances of you getting to any kind of weapon is slim to nil, they'll be on you like a buzzard on a gut wagon. You need to get them as they're coming in or closing on you. As distance increases the chance of missing with a handgun increases but it's the reverse with a shotgun because the pattern only gets bigger. Sure the chance of a fatal shot decreases but most homeowners aren't trying to kill someone, they just want to stop them. But back to the video, why would someone break into your house and risk getting shot when they can simply go on line, hack your pacemaker and turn you off? (Or administer a shock as in his example) Or inject some genetically altered virus into your office buildings HVAC system? Or hack into your home security system and shut everything down? Genetically altered drugs distributed at will, terrorist spreading altered viruses that are drug resistant wiping entire populations. It's some scary stuff.
  6. Just my experience, I've never been shot at or held up by a crook with a gun, and I'm in Atlanta's bad neighborhoods a lot. I have been shot at some five or six times by people who had their guns legally but were using them improperly or illegally. Nothing like sitting in a tree stand and hearing that whizzzzzz then a bang because some jerk thinks it's OK to just shoot blindly into the woods (he shot some 6 times in rapid secession) or the sound of birdshot raining down around you because someone isn't paying attention to what's beyond their target. I was on an archery only parcel and told these guys that fact and that I'd be in there in a tree stand but they went in shooting squirrels out of trees anyway. An idiot with a gun scares me as much as a crook with one.
  7. The Supreme Court long ago decided that rights granted by the second amendment, like most rights, are not unlimited. From their recent decision on the District of Columbia v Heller-"It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues." In the same decision they state that "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." In other words, you have the right to own a gun and you can carry all you want on your property, but you don't have the right to carry it anywhere you want, any time you want and your rights are not being infringed by those limitations. You want to test it, take a gun to the airport or on school property or carry in a public place without a permit. Basically my statement was that it is my opinion the standards for issuance of the carry permits are far too lenient and too many nut cases are being granted a right that's not guaranteed by the Constitution. Case in point? George Zimmerman. It's people like this that make the rest of us law abiding citizens look bad.
  8. I didn't say anything about his 2nd amendment rights, I said right to carry, these are two different things.
  9. I hate the "warm body" human resources management style. I've experienced it on both sides of the counter, as a customer and as a manager. The one that needs to be fired is the human resources officer that keeps hiring unqualified people.
  10. Seems every anniversary I learn something new (or maybe am just reminded of something I had forgotten). The other night I heard recorded phone conversations between LBJ and Chief Justice Warren, and, LBJ and Senator Richard Russell (the two didn't get along) insisting that they be part of the investigative commission. LBJ was barely being polite but he knew what was at stake and didn't have time for personalities and hurt feelings. He told Senator Russell something like "if I tell you ta suit-up for this country, by God, you're gonna do it!"
  11. I'm of the opinion that anyone with a restraining order, charges of assault, a plea bargain that includes mandated anger management courses and similar should be denied a right to carry permit. Such a persons previous behavior has indicated a tendency to solve problems with violence and they should not be allowed the right to carry a weapon out in public. A guy repeatedly beats up his wife but she presses no charges after the police have been called so he has no arrests or convictions. Should he be able to pass a background check? He would based on a conviction only standard and that makes no sense.
  12. Maybe everyone is overlooking something here, maybe this girl was a PMSing C-word that deserved to have a gun pulled on her and for her to be thrown out of her own house. (Philosophy used by many in the Martin situation)
  13. And a restraining order and an assaulting an officer charge that was plea bargained.
  14. Gee, I try and stay away from "the kittens" at hunt'n camp. And bring'em home? My wife'id kill me. LOL
  15. The thought is that "splatter" goes places and seeps onto cracks and crevices that you just can't clean, especially when you're busy cooking a meal. It even splatters on your clothing, few change after prepping a bird. I suppose the proper way is to look like you're about to perform surgery, gown, mask, gloves.... And those giblets? They get cooked and cutup and thrown into the stuffing! just don't tell my kids.
  • Create New...