It never ceases to amaze me how people can avoid addressing something they cannot accept, instead simply reinforcing flawed logic to justify an untenable position.
To reiterate the original concept: firearms are limited machines, subject to mechanical failure, loss, lack of ammunition.
Knowledge and skills are not subject to these effects, barring brain damage or crippling, and in that case the firearm would be relatively useless also.
If one relies solely on firearms, lacks other skills to accomplish the same aims, and loses the effectiveness of said firearm(s), then one is left with nothing other than flight, surrender, or unskilled, ineffectual resistance while unarmed or attempting to utilize improvised weapons.
It should not be that difficult to comprehend that position/argument, unless of course you simply will not, or cannot address it rationally.
You seem to take the position that fighting without the benefit of firearms is futile unless one can accomplish and maintain some sort of mythical ninja level of competence. This is an absolutely false position to assume as fact. A basic level of accomplishment can ofttimes be the difference between prevailing and failure. Being an expert is great, but some level of training and confidence is better than none.
I think you know these things, but you do not want to accept them as factual. You would rather deny the entire possibility that anyone less than expert could survive a fight without a firearm.
You illustrate well what I said about denial and justification of same. I would hope that others who read this thread could entertain the possibility of defending themselves with something short of a chaingun and a boxcar full of ammo. Maybe a kitchen knife, or an axe handle, or a hammer, or about a million other common objects that can be utilized as weapons with simply a very basic knowledge about how to move and where to strike.
I have clearly made my point, and I would gladly engage in useful discussion concerning the aspects of the subject, but I am done with arguing against a brick wall.
I never intended for this subject to be seen as a personal attack against those, myself included, who rely on firearms as a first line of defense. I intended that we should think a bit farther down the road of possibility, probability.
Best wishes, good luck …………
-
This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by
ephemeral.
