Killing People with your bare hands

I wish more people knew how to kill with their bare hands. I wish it were a normal part of our culture to learn these skills. That way, the gun argument would be less of an issue. People who could do it would be less afraid of attack, and people who couldn’t would have no way to impose their will upon someone who they are intimidated by, because they’d have no gun to take away.

I’ve studied a few martial arts, and I probably could kill someone with my bare hands ‘in theory’.

The best thing I’ve learned from Martial arts though is how many lethal objects there are all around all the time. So while I am totally against gun control, I don’t really have a desire to own one, it just seems like the social pressure makes the gun less worth it, and I think if someone broke into my apartment I can think of a number of things I could hurt them really badly with long before I could fish my gun out from wherever it was.

I think the dumbest thing about the pro-gun control crowd is simply that while it might diminish the number of accidental gun deaths, the saturation of guns in America is so high, that getting a gun will be easy for a long time, even if it’s not legal. So gun control has very little bearing on the people who are willing to shoot you intentionally.

Also, the irony of it is, if people weren’t trying to tell me what to do. i.e. take away guns, I’d probably feel less compelled to own one. (Even though I already said I wasn’t terribly compelled to own one.)

Erek

Oh, I see, we should not have gun control because it wouldn’t be 100% effective instantly. Makes sense.

We also should not have laws against murder, because, really, if someone wants to kill you, are they really going to stop because its against the law? :dubious:
Yeah, yeah, fallacy, schmallacy. :smiley:

Actually I think practicality is a very important consideration when making a law. I am sorry you don’t see it as being an important facet to the legal process. Luckily for you the government seems to be in your court.

In that case what laws would you want?

Should it be illegal to give a lion a blow job because it is impractical and no one has ever done it (I hope) and that’s the legal books finished?

I would venture to say that every single crime on the books is there because someone once did it, thus making it practical.

When blowing lions is outlawed, only outlaws will blow lions.

Towards the OP: The gun is the ‘great equilizer’, because even a little old lady with arthritic joints can still use one effectively. It also requires a heck of a lot less training to learn how to shoot than to become a black belt in Aikido.

And the lions will rejoice.

Little old ladies can learn to kill with their barehands too, when one is a master it is not the strength in their arms, but the precision of their touch that is lethal.

But I am just as happy with Grandma blowing the perp away with her 357 even if I would be prouder if she used Dim Mak.

As for the incredibly dumbass comparison to fellating a lion, I was the one proposing NOT making extra laws due to impracticality, not proposing laws against doing things that are impractical.

I like the “game balance” that grandmas have with 357s against thugs trying to steal her VCR. If guns were illegal then Grandma woudl be the one without the 357, not the thug.

Erek

But there ARE laws against beastiality. You seemed to be saying that if it a crime was practical then it shouldn’t be a crime, just something we should train grandmas to deal with.

I’m happy you are confident in making sure only grandmas not grandma killers have guns. When do you suppose the first “Crims-Grandmas, Swap guns for life” conference will happen?

Calm Kiwi: I never said anything about taking guns from the Grandma killers. They need the gun so the Grandma can get off with self-defense more easily when she blows a hole in his chest you can toss a calm kiwi through.

Anyway, I think the second amendment is as vital today as it was ever. However, this argument is about the inability of kneejerk liberal pantywaists to take away my deadly ninja claw, and not about gun control.

I’m well fucked then. I have no Ninja skills and I can’t own a gun…unless I take up duck hunting and get a gun licence.

Guess I’m just stuck with the law…sans lion Bj’s

But will lambs lie down with them?

Sweet merciful Og, another Clinton thread?

Lion about blow jobs is as bad as lion about anything else. And he was under Oath!

Bill is a Serval amongst the big cats :smiley:

Is this a whooossssh? Is your whole op a whoosh?

If it was part of our culture, the criminal would have these skills as well.

And I don’t care what kind of special ninja skills you give an infirm person. They will have no chance against a healthy younger person that has 100 pounds on them.

Also, self defense is not the only reason we own guns. It is often just a side benefit.

I once killed a dragon with my bare hands.

“Kill the dragon with your bare hands?”
>Yes

I just had this mental image of a hunter leaping out of the deer stand, ninja style, onto an unsuspecting stag…

Whether you agree with gun control or not, you have to admit the idea of being able to kill someone with your bare hands is sometimes a very appealing idea…

There is one problem. To do it with your hands means you have to get close enough. Very close. There is also no guarantee that your enemy isn’t a better fighter. Sure you can use a knife or pencil, even teeth etc, but you have to get close and be fast enough to connect. Also, as you get older the bones get weaker and more brittle. You may hit with enough force to crush bricks, but that sort of power does no good if YOUR bones break under the force. Then factor in arthritis. Granny is not doing any flying spin kicks if she is all crippled up with rheumatiz.
Colonel Colt supposedly built the “equalizer”, in that small person could now protect themselves from the giants. People knew how to fight, but size does matter.

It’s like the old tagline, “Never bring a knife to a gunfight”.

Yes, I’m well aware of that.
Now tell me how my 84 year old grandmother who can barely walk is expected to get her butt down to the dojo and practice until she becomes a master? Or would it be easier to give her a handgun and take her to the range for practice?

You miss my point, while having gramma become a ninja master capable of administering the ‘death touch’ would be neat… (I guess), it’s far less likely that she’d be able to actually take the required courses (and move fast enough in an actual combat situation) rather than squeezing a trigger.

So training young 'uns in Aikido or what have you is just fine, but even if I’m a young 'un, I’d still like to have the ability to pull a gun. Gun vs. Master Ninja, gun wins, with a bullet.

So the logic is that the only times you should fight are those in which you’ve given yourself an ubeatable advantage?