Why not use a Byrna gun for self-defense?

You can still defend yourself while avoiding the downsides of owning a lethal weapon.

 

If you are facing lethal force and have something less than lethal force to respond with, you are handicapped. when the people who guard our anti gun politicians give up their HK SMGs and 17 round Glock semi auto pistols in favor of those things, maybe your question might have a bit more merit

 

Just because professionals need access to certain equipment doesn't mean you do too. Do you own a firetruck?

 

I have the same Right of self defense as any "professional: (BTW I am-I was a firearms instructor for the DOJ, I am certified to teach CCW classes in Ohio, and I was a member of the US Shooting team) my credentials as a firearms instructor is way way above most police. If you aren't a member of the free press do you need a typewriter or an internet connection? what a silly question you asked

 

@Galileo -I have a great idea, those of you who don't think you can handle firearms-buy those things. For those of us are not going to handicap ourselves with inferior weaponry in the face of well armed criminals, we will continue to keep our firearms.

 

Being a lethal threat is a big part of deterring attackers. People start fights all the time for no reason knowing they stand to get far more injured than this 'un-gun' will do. It looks like it will help stop an attack in progress, but its unlikely to prevent many from starting. Lethal firearms on the other hand make some criminals hesitant to even engage in the first place, their instinct for self preservation overpowering their desire for whatever they would've taken from you.

That said, some people would rather risk their own life than someone else's even in self defense, and this does look like the best alternative for them.

I reckon this will be fairly popular until the first criminal to get shot in the eye it sues their victim for a bajillion dollars and people go back to lethal weaponry.

 

doesn't look very effective in the following situations

1)multiple attackers (five rounds is not enough) my handgun has 17 rounds and my rifles 27 rounds.
2) attackers behind cover or using counter measures
3) attackers at more than a few yards

 

If it gets popular enough, someone will extend the mag.

It might be a good 'gateway gun' for folks currently afeared of firearms, try this thing out, and realize the concept it less scary than they thought.

Also the not being banned anywhere is an attractive selling point, until we can get certain states and cities to respect the constitution again...

 

I can see about 10 ways to defeat such a weapon easily.

 

Well sure, but how often are you trying knife people for crack money or steal their shoes? No weapon is perfect... I'd definitely rather have a firearm in all circumstances, but if this helps people who refuse to carry a real gun, its still a net positive.

Actually, I spose I would feel pretty bad killing someone over my shoes or something. Wouldnt bad at all about blasting them in the face a few times with 'un-gun.' Maybe carry both? That could get confusing...

Still not a bad idea. Not better than a gun tho...

 

no doubt but I will leave it for those who are afraid of firearms

 

Only because I can't afford to own one. I have smoke detectors and fire extinguishers, though.

 

I could. I have the right to own any fire truck that I can afford, and so do you and everyone else. They require a team to use effectively, unlike firearms, so I havnt sought to purchase a firetruck even though I could afford (a heavily used) one. They are a PITA to maintain properly. I guarantee that anyone selling a firetruck will not be requiring proof of need or proof of proficiency.

...what was your point anyway?

 

his point is that he only trusts government agents to possess firearms

 

You're clearly not a professional debater but someone gave you access to the internet anyway.

 

Except when they're posting about how they don't trust the police.

 

Why not one of those Acme guns where a little flag pops out that says "Bang!" on it.

 

I don't own one because its expensive, but I could go buy one had I the funds. No questions asked.

I simply want the same to apply, as the constitution demands.

Is my wife's life worth less than Kim Kardashian's? I think not, in point of fact I find my wife of infinitely more value. Therefore she should be able to be defended with an MP7 in the same way.
There is no distinction for rich idiots in the 2a. No class stratification.
This is just such a weak argument.

 

Clearly while not a professional he is a master debator.

 

Wonder if he's any good at fishing.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...p-shooting-video-cop-killed-Greg-McCowan.html

^ That is why.

 

You think he's a bait man? Or would he prefer the lure?

 

That pic of her elbow being locked out annoys me.

 

Because it might be a bad idea to start using what's basically a co2 powered paintball gun and get someone who might start shooting with real lead?

They have some interesting Big bore air gun pistols that shoot lead slugs with deadly effect, I thought about getting one but the air cartridge system is known to leak over time rendering the weapon totally useless if you need it to work and it doesn't.

Maybe someone will perfect that system soon.

And as has been demonstrated clearly, there are people that will sit there and eat pepper spray and taser darts and keep right on coming. Pretty sure getting a good Sting with a pepper ball is not going to stop a person like that

 

It's fun telling Democrats about how you got a .50 cal without a background check. I love doing that.