Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Ladies
Posted by: ravensmuse Oct 22 2011, 12:50 AM
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/3167/006ghy.jpg
Thoughts ladies? Gents? People who like to carry concealed weapons?
Posted by: Paul Oct 22 2011, 12:56 AM
I know several officers in my department who run CCW courses, and weapons (Mostly hand gun) familiarization courses. I also know several of them also sell surplus military, security or LEO equipment. And several ranges in the area-mostly the more upscale places-offer courses in this vein. I think I know a guy who runs a "Defensive Driving" school, that specializes in teaching people how to drive VIP's in formal settings, and "anti-terrorism" (His words not mine) driving techniques and tactics.
My wife has recently expressed interest in some of these.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 22 2011, 01:03 AM
I'm not a lady, but I do live in Canada's highest violent crime capital. I'll let people here drawn their own conclusions.
Posted by: Paul Oct 22 2011, 01:08 AM
Canada has crime? 
And here we Michgander's just thought you were all up there sharpening your ice skates, waitin for your opportunities to pass your money off on us! 
Posted by: HunterHerne Oct 22 2011, 01:11 AM
QUOTE (Paul @ Oct 21 2011, 09:08 PM) 
Canada has crime? And here we Michgander's just thought you were all up there sharpening your ice skates, waitin for your opportunities to pass your money off on us!
And here we Michgander's just thought you were all up there sharpening your ice skates, waitin for your opportunities to pass your money off on us! http://thepunchlineismachismo.com/archives/304
This explains us Canadians (though obviously Canray and I (and the other Canadians on here) are better speakers)
Posted by: Saint Hallow Oct 22 2011, 04:39 AM
Ironically, I live in NYC. This city is known for violence, bloodshed, & generally being an inhospitable place to outsiders. The number of CCW licenses here is TINY. As for which ladies would sign up for these lessons... ironically again, not a lot would I think in this city.
Posted by: Jekolmy Oct 22 2011, 05:50 AM
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Oct 21 2011, 10:39 PM)
Ironically, I live in NYC. This city is known for violence, bloodshed, & generally being an inhospitable place to outsiders. The number of CCW licenses here is TINY. As for which ladies would sign up for these lessons... ironically again, not a lot would I think in this city.
Not being a resident of New York I may be mistaken, but isn't it fairly illegal to possess a firearm (registered or not) within the city limits of NYC?
Posted by: Saint Hallow Oct 22 2011, 06:41 AM
QUOTE (Jekolmy @ Oct 22 2011, 01:50 AM)
Not being a resident of New York I may be mistaken, but isn't it fairly illegal to possess a firearm (registered or not) within the city limits of NYC?
Nope. If you have a license, you may own a firearm in NYC.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/permits/gun_licensing_faq.shtml. If you are asking about a CCW, that's a whole another migraine and a half.
Posted by: KarmaInferno Oct 22 2011, 07:10 AM
In short, NY City requires a license to own any sort of firearm, whereas the rest of the state only requires licenses for Handguns.
Which is why when I moved from Texas to Westchester, NY I kept my shotgun but had to sell my pistols, cos the process for getting a handgun permit in NY is a massive gigantic pain in the ass, and unlike most other states they do NOT accept out-of-state licenses for any reason.
There are technically Concealed Carry licenses, but good luck in getting one.
It's generally not really possible to actually ban firearm ownership completely in the United States. We have this Amendment protecting the right to bear arms, you see. The most they can do is make it difficult to obtain a permit.
-k
Posted by: Saint Hallow Oct 22 2011, 07:54 AM
QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Oct 22 2011, 03:10 AM)
The most they can do is make it difficult to obtain a permit.
NYC has perfected this to an art.
Posted by: Sengir Oct 22 2011, 09:26 AM
QUOTE
Ladies, ...have you ever felt...unsafe?
Am I the only one who thought of a tampon ad first?
Posted by: Faraday Oct 22 2011, 09:45 AM
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Oct 22 2011, 12:54 AM)
NYC has perfected this to an art.
And then you have some places where you can open carry. Go figure.
Posted by: Saint Hallow Oct 22 2011, 09:52 AM
QUOTE (Sengir @ Oct 22 2011, 04:26 AM)
Am I the only one who thought of a tampon ad first?
Nope. First thought in my head was for a douche/cleaner. I did learn from a female friend that a .22 round will fit perfectly in a plastic/cardboard tampon. Don't know how she figured it out or why... I didn't want to know.
Posted by: ravensmuse Oct 22 2011, 10:29 AM
QUOTE (Sengir @ Oct 22 2011, 05:26 AM)
Am I the only one who thought of a tampon ad first?
I think this is part of the reason my wife and I started laughing at this.
Posted by: Sengir Oct 23 2011, 12:20 PM
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Oct 22 2011, 10:52 AM)
I did learn from a female friend that a .22 round will fit perfectly in a plastic/cardboard tampon. Don't know how she figured it out or why... I didn't want to know.
Well, I'm still waiting for the day the TSA bans tampons because they could be used to disguise an explosive plus fuse chord
Posted by: Neraph Oct 23 2011, 04:09 PM
QUOTE (Faraday @ Oct 22 2011, 04:45 AM)
And then you have some places where you can open carry. Go figure.
Az is Right To Carry. Texas is thinking about it.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 23 2011, 05:28 PM
QUOTE (Sengir @ Oct 23 2011, 07:20 AM)
Well, I'm still waiting for the day the TSA bans tampons because they could be used to disguise an explosive plus fuse chord
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!!!
Posted by: Ryu Oct 23 2011, 07:31 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 23 2011, 07:28 PM)
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!!!
Well, there are some follow-up ideas on that.
Posted by: Dez384 Oct 23 2011, 09:33 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 23 2011, 01:28 PM)
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!!!
Don't give my players ideas
Posted by: Loch Oct 24 2011, 12:44 AM
QUOTE (Dez384 @ Oct 23 2011, 05:33 PM)
Don't give my players ideas
Exploding tampons, eh?
Naaahh...I think peanut butter detonating doggies are much better, both in terms of explosive yield and psychological damage.
Posted by: Saint Hallow Oct 24 2011, 03:08 AM
QUOTE (Loch @ Oct 23 2011, 07:44 PM)
Exploding tampons, eh?
Naaahh...I think peanut butter detonating doggies are much better, both in terms of explosive yield and psychological damage.
Naaahh...I think peanut butter detonating doggies are much better, both in terms of explosive yield and psychological damage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma50uL1MU-M
Posted by: Loch Oct 24 2011, 03:34 AM
Yes, but when you have access to bigger critters, why stop there? 
Posted by: CanRay Oct 24 2011, 05:12 AM
Exploding Devil and Demon Rats?
Posted by: Loch Oct 24 2011, 05:14 AM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 24 2011, 01:12 AM)
Exploding Devil and Demon Rats?
If Heavy Weapons Troll could catch them easily, he might try it. Junkyard dogs are always available though, and they looooove peanut butter.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 24 2011, 05:25 AM
"I am Heavy Weapons Troll, and this is my Gun... Sasha."
OK, armed ladies out there, what have you named your firearms?
Posted by: tehana Oct 24 2011, 12:34 PM
True story. I used to record concerts using a mini recorder that fit inside a tampon. This was well over 10 years ago when I was younger and stupider.
I still believe there is a lot you can do under the guise of a female hygiene product.
On the concealed weapons front. I went looking for a taser when I was starting college. My school was in a not so nice neighborhood and I'm not exactly the most imposing looking female, so I wanted something to give me a little reassurance. The only place I could find to purchase one was in a gun store (This was before the wealth of online shopping that is available) and no one would sell me the taser. I went to several shops and each one only wanted to sell me a small pistol. The logic I heard? "If you need to use it, you won't get in trouble. It's self defense." On one hand. Cool, empowering. On another, eh, not so much. I'm all for firearms (Look what forum I'm posting on), but their logic just broke my brain in some bizarre way.
Posted by: PittsburghRPGA Oct 24 2011, 02:45 PM
I live in Pennsylvania, which is an open carry & shall issue state, except for Philadelphia.
Open Carry means specifically you are allowed to have a hand gun in its holster on your belt visible for all to see. You can't wear it in a car though (and a handful of other places).
Shall Issue means that a License to Carry Firearms shall be issued unless there is just cause to prevent you from owning firearms (mental defect, felony conviction, etc). It also does not mandate that you must concealed carry, it just makes concealed carry a legal option for you.
Philadelphia has a slightly different set of rules because it's population is over 1 million. There, you are not allowed to open carry unless you have a LTCF, and then the Philly police department will still harass the shit out of you.
And because Full Metal Jacket amuses me, I have given all of my firearms girl's names. But the most fun is still Olga, my old M44 Mosin-Nagant bolt action carbine with side folding bayonet. Olga's not the prettiest, but she is often the loudest at the range (with only the one fellow's Barret .50 cal being louder), is the only one with day light muzzle flash, and always go mudda fragging BOOM (My pistols only go bang & my .30-06 only goes boom).
And tasers aren't as good as even smaller cailber pistols because a good thick coat will stop most currently made taser from doing it's thing. They are getting better though. Also, pistols look more intimidating than tasers, and are thus morely likely to cause a perp to flee before you have to discharge the weapon.
And yeah, I'm one of those right wing gun nuts (though I prefer fire arms enthusiast) with a PA LTCF and a C&R FFL.
Cordially,
Eric
Posted by: Paul Oct 24 2011, 02:53 PM
Nice transition from I carry concealed to large rifle.
Posted by: Sengir Oct 24 2011, 03:19 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 23 2011, 05:28 PM)
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!!!
If I wanted to give them any ideas, I'd post this:
QUOTE
United States Department of Edutainment presents:
JILL RIDES AN AIRPLANE!
FASCO Films Department: © 2015
Jill is 23. She is going to fly from Newark, New Jersey to Los Angeles to see her grandmother, whom she hasn't seen since she was 11.
A few months ago, Jill had to go to her state-approved physician to apply for a Right to Fly exam (a FASCO class C exam). She had to submit blood tests and take a basic psychological profile exam (30 minutes of 500 questions). Her doctor passed her, and she was able to apply to the Federal Air Safety Control Office for a FASCO 101 compliance. In her paperwork, she had to detail her arrival and departure time, purpose of visit, a list of people she would see on her visit, a list of her last 4 previous addresses, and a list of all places she has visited for more than 1 hour 20 miles or more away from home. In addition, she has to provide the names and contact information of two witnesses who can vouch for her status as a citizen where one of them has to already have FASCO clearance within the last 5 years. The entire form has to then be notarized, submitted with some DNA samples, a fingerprint, and a current photo. Upon completion, Jill submits the entire set of forms, and waits 4-6 weeks.
Jill's boss, Mr. Sterner, flys frequently. He only has to submit a FASCO 201 when he wants to fly. He has to reapply for his FASCO 201 status every five years, but it only takes 2 weeks to get his 201 authorization back. After all, Mr. Sterner is a very important man!
Six weeks later, Jill gets her authorization which is good only for the flight she applied for. Should the flight plans change, she will have to reapply, but only use a FASCO 103 to reassign her destination time and dates, and that process takes only 1-2 weeks, or just a few hours if she drops by a FASCO office in person. Her authorization packet contains a copy of her submitted paperwork and her authorization, printed in a small booklet with color shifting ink and holograms to prevent forgeries.
Just before she left, Jill put her travel needs into a box and had it shipped to her destination using her favorite commercial carrier. She went to the airport wearing only comfortable casual clothes, her identification, and a small bag with some books to read, and a disposable one-day use cash card with a balance of all the money she should need for the day. Jill has read her homework, and is prepared to fly into safety!
She takes a cab to the airport arrival station. It's a large building in front of a securely guarded airport. As she passes by the throngs of people saying goodbye to loved ones, she makes sure she has her papers and smiles in anticipation of her safe and comfortable flight.
The airplane departure area is far away from the actual airport. Jill can hear the planes, but not see them yet. Be patient, Jill, we wouldn't want to spoil the surprise! She steps up to the line to her ticket booth. Gone are the lines to various carriers, they already know you're coming! She merely separates into lines for those who had FASCO Class 1, like herself, as well as Class 2, for people like her boss, and Class 3 for government or emergency workers.
When she gets to the counter, a uniformed woman takes her booklet, and compares it to her ID. She asks for a fingerprint scan. Uh oh! There's a problem. Jill can't remember what finger she used! But the lady helps her out, and within minutes, she's approved to go into the disrobing chamber. The lady gives her a neck tag, stamps Jill's forehead, and sends her on her way past the many guards down a hallway.
Jill knows what to expect. Helpful pictograph signs show her what she will be doing when she gets to the disrobing room. At the end of the hallway, she steps into a free closet, and strips down naked. Don't forget those earrings and hair bands, Jill! Jill remembered that the safety of her personal belongings could never be guaranteed, so she came wearing nothing she couldn't afford to lose. She puts her belongings in a plastic bag, and seals it nice and tight. She sees herself in the mirror. Oh my, Jill. We have been gaining a little weight, haven't we? Better lay off those desserts at the buffet when you're in Los Angeles, Jill!
Then she puts her tag around her neck, and inspects the red stamp on her forehead. It identifies that she's been passed by Desk 34 in Newark. The New Jersey seal of safety approval shines like a beacon of safety, letting Jill relax and know she's in capable hands. It helps in a crowd of people to identify she's authorized to be a passenger. It does not rub off until she will later wipe it off with a mild alcoholic solution. But for now, it is a reassuring red mark that she has safe and will be taken care of.
She takes the sticker off her sealed bag, and puts it in the designated area in her booklet. This will assure her that she can be identified with her belongings upon her arrival. Looking in the shelf, she grabs an "airplane gown," a form-fitting elastic jumpsuit similar to the snuggly pajamas she wore as a little girl. As the soft microfiber adheres to her skin, she admires her figure with small pale FASCO logos on them. She then grabs a set of disposable airline slippers and puts them on.
Now she's ready to fly!
[swell of orchestra music]
Taking her bag, she submits it to a guard near a line of people, waiting to go onto the security conveyor system. Like the sidewalks of tomorrow, they roll passengers past a series of safety rays, which scan for bomb and drug residue, as well as X-ray for any unauthorized implants of concealed cargo someone might carry. Good thing you didn't eat this morning, because they could tell you what's making you a little pudgy, Jill!
At the end of the line, you are told to go through one of several gates by a random number assigned to your ID tag. Randomly, you might be selected for extra deep scanning. Jill has not been selected, and from the sounds of the young well-developed teen ahead of her who was, it doesn't sound pleasant! Don't worry, Jill. That young girl is very safe thanks to a series of trained men who will keep her private and snug behind sealed doors. The deep scanning is to make sure that nobody is an enemy agent in league with a bad FASCO employee. While no enemy FASCO agent has ever been reported, it's thanks in part to random deep scanning and time-trusted series of rapid questions. After a few minutes with those boys, that girl would tell them anything they need to know! Including her boyfriend's secret nickname! And thanks to overhead safety laws used by US Customs, nobody can use the US Constitution against the rest of America. So don't worry, Jill. That girl is as safe as you are!
Once sorted and scanned, Jill is put on a bus, which will take her to the actual airport. Jill is excited, because she will get to be on a real AIRPLANE! While she has trouble containing her glee, Jill remembers that no talking is allowed on the bus with other passengers. After all, that driver has to concentrate on the road with almost no windows on the bus!
Once a tangled mess of confused people, airports are now modern areas of traffic efficiency! As the bus unloads its stream of warm and clean passengers, Jill is only minutes away from her airplane gate! In the olden days, this would take hours, and she would be led astray with the confusion of hallways, excess traffic, and merchants pestering here. But now as she follows the crowds to their scanning points, uniformed guards will scan her tags, and helpfully tell her where to go.
A turn to the left [beep]
A turn to the right [beep]
Down that hall [beep]
And then...
[music swells]
The AIRPLANE!
[chorus of angels]
Jill sits in the waiting area. The pilots and mechanics want to make sure that the airplane is juuust right for Jill's visit to her grandmother. Hours seem like minutes until she is escorted down a long hallway to the airplane itself.
Soothing music plays as Jill is seated. Everything has been taken care of for her. And while the seats seem awfully small, it won't matter once they get to flying. Jill is so excited, she hopes she can stay awake for the takeoff!
The plane is quickly filled and humming with the anticipation of a good flight. The captain states the flight information and remind people to lie back and relax as he rolls the airplane down the runway and the armed attendants put on their masks. Jill does not even hear the gentle hiss of the gas as it fills the cabin with its flowery smell. Just think Jill, the plane needs perfume just like you do! She knows that she's not going to have a reaction to the sleep gas because she had an exam from her physician! As she drifts to sleep, she gets the sensation of flying with a small smile on her lips...
... and landing! Jill awakens slowly. To Jill, only minutes have passed, but her muscles are stiff. Weather complication during a layover added an hour or two to their arrival time, but their tags have already been updated for them due to the modern computer system that keeps track of all its little passengers. The attendants give Jill some bottled water with a mild stimulant to help wear off the effects of the sleep gas. They are just like mom, always making her sleepyheads are awake!
When they get to the gate, Jill is filed off the plane and scanned. Her legs are stiff and sore, but quickly flow with new blood as she awaits her turn to be sorted and moved to a bus that will take her to the airport arrival station in Los Angeles. Her heart skips a beat when she sees the older airport towers of the retired LAX Museum of Flight. She can't believe she's really here!
Jill stands patiently in line, awaiting her clothing. It seems to take forever! They match her booklet and tag, find her sealed bag, and send her to a disrobing room to change into her normal clothing. She keeps the disposable slippers as a souvenir of her grand journey.
Is that Grandma outside, behind the two fences and barbed wire? It might just be...
[grand music plays and Jill and grandma hug one another]
Grandma! Oh, how she's missed her little girl! And that long nap has made Jill look refreshed and radiant! The stamp on her forehead glistens in the California sun as they go to Grandmas house and talk about Jill's exciting day...
On an AIRPLANE!
[music swells, credits play]
JILL RIDES AN AIRPLANE!
FASCO Films Department: © 2015
Jill is 23. She is going to fly from Newark, New Jersey to Los Angeles to see her grandmother, whom she hasn't seen since she was 11.
A few months ago, Jill had to go to her state-approved physician to apply for a Right to Fly exam (a FASCO class C exam). She had to submit blood tests and take a basic psychological profile exam (30 minutes of 500 questions). Her doctor passed her, and she was able to apply to the Federal Air Safety Control Office for a FASCO 101 compliance. In her paperwork, she had to detail her arrival and departure time, purpose of visit, a list of people she would see on her visit, a list of her last 4 previous addresses, and a list of all places she has visited for more than 1 hour 20 miles or more away from home. In addition, she has to provide the names and contact information of two witnesses who can vouch for her status as a citizen where one of them has to already have FASCO clearance within the last 5 years. The entire form has to then be notarized, submitted with some DNA samples, a fingerprint, and a current photo. Upon completion, Jill submits the entire set of forms, and waits 4-6 weeks.
Jill's boss, Mr. Sterner, flys frequently. He only has to submit a FASCO 201 when he wants to fly. He has to reapply for his FASCO 201 status every five years, but it only takes 2 weeks to get his 201 authorization back. After all, Mr. Sterner is a very important man!
Six weeks later, Jill gets her authorization which is good only for the flight she applied for. Should the flight plans change, she will have to reapply, but only use a FASCO 103 to reassign her destination time and dates, and that process takes only 1-2 weeks, or just a few hours if she drops by a FASCO office in person. Her authorization packet contains a copy of her submitted paperwork and her authorization, printed in a small booklet with color shifting ink and holograms to prevent forgeries.
Just before she left, Jill put her travel needs into a box and had it shipped to her destination using her favorite commercial carrier. She went to the airport wearing only comfortable casual clothes, her identification, and a small bag with some books to read, and a disposable one-day use cash card with a balance of all the money she should need for the day. Jill has read her homework, and is prepared to fly into safety!
She takes a cab to the airport arrival station. It's a large building in front of a securely guarded airport. As she passes by the throngs of people saying goodbye to loved ones, she makes sure she has her papers and smiles in anticipation of her safe and comfortable flight.
The airplane departure area is far away from the actual airport. Jill can hear the planes, but not see them yet. Be patient, Jill, we wouldn't want to spoil the surprise! She steps up to the line to her ticket booth. Gone are the lines to various carriers, they already know you're coming! She merely separates into lines for those who had FASCO Class 1, like herself, as well as Class 2, for people like her boss, and Class 3 for government or emergency workers.
When she gets to the counter, a uniformed woman takes her booklet, and compares it to her ID. She asks for a fingerprint scan. Uh oh! There's a problem. Jill can't remember what finger she used! But the lady helps her out, and within minutes, she's approved to go into the disrobing chamber. The lady gives her a neck tag, stamps Jill's forehead, and sends her on her way past the many guards down a hallway.
Jill knows what to expect. Helpful pictograph signs show her what she will be doing when she gets to the disrobing room. At the end of the hallway, she steps into a free closet, and strips down naked. Don't forget those earrings and hair bands, Jill! Jill remembered that the safety of her personal belongings could never be guaranteed, so she came wearing nothing she couldn't afford to lose. She puts her belongings in a plastic bag, and seals it nice and tight. She sees herself in the mirror. Oh my, Jill. We have been gaining a little weight, haven't we? Better lay off those desserts at the buffet when you're in Los Angeles, Jill!
Then she puts her tag around her neck, and inspects the red stamp on her forehead. It identifies that she's been passed by Desk 34 in Newark. The New Jersey seal of safety approval shines like a beacon of safety, letting Jill relax and know she's in capable hands. It helps in a crowd of people to identify she's authorized to be a passenger. It does not rub off until she will later wipe it off with a mild alcoholic solution. But for now, it is a reassuring red mark that she has safe and will be taken care of.
She takes the sticker off her sealed bag, and puts it in the designated area in her booklet. This will assure her that she can be identified with her belongings upon her arrival. Looking in the shelf, she grabs an "airplane gown," a form-fitting elastic jumpsuit similar to the snuggly pajamas she wore as a little girl. As the soft microfiber adheres to her skin, she admires her figure with small pale FASCO logos on them. She then grabs a set of disposable airline slippers and puts them on.
Now she's ready to fly!
[swell of orchestra music]
Taking her bag, she submits it to a guard near a line of people, waiting to go onto the security conveyor system. Like the sidewalks of tomorrow, they roll passengers past a series of safety rays, which scan for bomb and drug residue, as well as X-ray for any unauthorized implants of concealed cargo someone might carry. Good thing you didn't eat this morning, because they could tell you what's making you a little pudgy, Jill!
At the end of the line, you are told to go through one of several gates by a random number assigned to your ID tag. Randomly, you might be selected for extra deep scanning. Jill has not been selected, and from the sounds of the young well-developed teen ahead of her who was, it doesn't sound pleasant! Don't worry, Jill. That young girl is very safe thanks to a series of trained men who will keep her private and snug behind sealed doors. The deep scanning is to make sure that nobody is an enemy agent in league with a bad FASCO employee. While no enemy FASCO agent has ever been reported, it's thanks in part to random deep scanning and time-trusted series of rapid questions. After a few minutes with those boys, that girl would tell them anything they need to know! Including her boyfriend's secret nickname! And thanks to overhead safety laws used by US Customs, nobody can use the US Constitution against the rest of America. So don't worry, Jill. That girl is as safe as you are!
Once sorted and scanned, Jill is put on a bus, which will take her to the actual airport. Jill is excited, because she will get to be on a real AIRPLANE! While she has trouble containing her glee, Jill remembers that no talking is allowed on the bus with other passengers. After all, that driver has to concentrate on the road with almost no windows on the bus!
Once a tangled mess of confused people, airports are now modern areas of traffic efficiency! As the bus unloads its stream of warm and clean passengers, Jill is only minutes away from her airplane gate! In the olden days, this would take hours, and she would be led astray with the confusion of hallways, excess traffic, and merchants pestering here. But now as she follows the crowds to their scanning points, uniformed guards will scan her tags, and helpfully tell her where to go.
A turn to the left [beep]
A turn to the right [beep]
Down that hall [beep]
And then...
[music swells]
The AIRPLANE!
[chorus of angels]
Jill sits in the waiting area. The pilots and mechanics want to make sure that the airplane is juuust right for Jill's visit to her grandmother. Hours seem like minutes until she is escorted down a long hallway to the airplane itself.
Soothing music plays as Jill is seated. Everything has been taken care of for her. And while the seats seem awfully small, it won't matter once they get to flying. Jill is so excited, she hopes she can stay awake for the takeoff!
The plane is quickly filled and humming with the anticipation of a good flight. The captain states the flight information and remind people to lie back and relax as he rolls the airplane down the runway and the armed attendants put on their masks. Jill does not even hear the gentle hiss of the gas as it fills the cabin with its flowery smell. Just think Jill, the plane needs perfume just like you do! She knows that she's not going to have a reaction to the sleep gas because she had an exam from her physician! As she drifts to sleep, she gets the sensation of flying with a small smile on her lips...
... and landing! Jill awakens slowly. To Jill, only minutes have passed, but her muscles are stiff. Weather complication during a layover added an hour or two to their arrival time, but their tags have already been updated for them due to the modern computer system that keeps track of all its little passengers. The attendants give Jill some bottled water with a mild stimulant to help wear off the effects of the sleep gas. They are just like mom, always making her sleepyheads are awake!
When they get to the gate, Jill is filed off the plane and scanned. Her legs are stiff and sore, but quickly flow with new blood as she awaits her turn to be sorted and moved to a bus that will take her to the airport arrival station in Los Angeles. Her heart skips a beat when she sees the older airport towers of the retired LAX Museum of Flight. She can't believe she's really here!
Jill stands patiently in line, awaiting her clothing. It seems to take forever! They match her booklet and tag, find her sealed bag, and send her to a disrobing room to change into her normal clothing. She keeps the disposable slippers as a souvenir of her grand journey.
Is that Grandma outside, behind the two fences and barbed wire? It might just be...
[grand music plays and Jill and grandma hug one another]
Grandma! Oh, how she's missed her little girl! And that long nap has made Jill look refreshed and radiant! The stamp on her forehead glistens in the California sun as they go to Grandmas house and talk about Jill's exciting day...
On an AIRPLANE!
[music swells, credits play]
Posted by: DamienKnight Oct 24 2011, 04:02 PM
I live in Tennessee where no permit is require to own guns. I have an unregistered pistol I keep at home for home defense.
Carrying requires a license that is VERY easy to get. 2 hour class and no criminal or mental health in your background and bam, your carrying. My workplace has a strick no firearms policy though, so I have never bothered to get a permit.
I have a co-worker with a permit, and he carrys ALL the TIME. He even carrys at home when he is in his bathrobe. Recently in his hometown a guy was going out to get his mail and some felon on a crime spree drove up and shot him. Didnt steal anything... the guy was wearing shorts and a bathrobe at the time, the criminal just wanted to shoot somebody.
He is a cyclist and goes on 20+ mile bike trips. He has affixed a holster to his bike and always brings his gun prominently displayed with him. Mostly in case of rabid animals, but also to dissuade random assholes on crime sprees.
At my church one of our deacons is a firearm instructor. A group of guys at our church all got their permits and formed security groups. Teams Alpha, Bravo and Charlie (i kid you not) and they take turns patrolling the hallways during church, all with concealed firearms. I think it partially started when a neighboring church almost had a girl abducted from the parking lot, but I think its mostly just because we are Tennessee good ole boys who like carrying guns.
My wife stays at home with our kids now, but she used to be a social worker. She would go alone to client's houses every day. I wish I could get her to carry a gun, but she is afraid of them. I did get her to carry mace at least, though in my opinion any woman who is going to be going alone to dangerous places should be carrying a deadly weapon.
If someone broke into my home I would shoot to kill, no warning. I think if someone attacks a woman, that woman has the right to shoot her attacker with a clear conscience. I think if more private citizens carried guns, crime would decrease significantly.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 24 2011, 04:52 PM
"An armed society is a polite society" breaks down when you're dealing with Canadians. Of course, more Canadians are armed that you'd think. Especially in Rural Canada (Which, frankly, is everything that isn't on the border for the most part.). It's usually rifles and shotguns rather than pistols, however. Some of which have been in the family since WWI.
That said, I live in the Violent Crime Capital of Canada. 
No firearms licenses for me (I'm sure I'm on already too many watch lists, thankyouverymuch), and I just have what's around the house for home protection.
On the bright side, I'm really good at improvising, and have a 100-year old house (Literally, just celebrated it's birthday!), so everything is exceptionally tight with small rooms to make heating them easier. If I'm in range of them, there's very few places in the house where they're not in range of me as well, even if all I have is the old meat cleaver.
The bad news is that, from my understanding, Canada doesn't even have anything near "Castle Laws", and even protecting myself and my family will get me in court for "Assault" at best. But, better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6, as one Veteran told me.
On the bright side, I'm in a decent enough neighborhood. For now. The crime areas move in the city, and can literally change from block-to-block. No, I'm not kidding.
Posted by: Sengir Oct 24 2011, 07:23 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 24 2011, 05:52 PM)
"An armed society is a polite society"
An armed society is moar pink mohawk!
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Oct 24 2011, 07:37 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 24 2011, 01:52 PM)
That said, I live in the Violent Crime Capital of Canada.
So, just for the lulz, let's "compare our sizes". Recife had last month the lowest number of murders in the last 14 years.
[ Spoiler ]
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
Posted by: tehana Oct 24 2011, 07:48 PM
I went to school in the inner city of Cincinnati. Sounds nice right? Then you realize thathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-Rhine#Crime next to my college and where I had to go buy art supplies.
Totally should have had a gun.
After doing that I'm really not scared of any neighborhood. Crime happens, you just have to be smart.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 24 2011, 08:23 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Oct 24 2011, 02:37 PM)
So, just for the lulz, let's "compare our sizes". Recife had last month the lowest number of murders in the last 14 years.
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. As of September 1st, 29 murders this year so far. Yeah yeah yeah, I know, not high for a world perspective in some places, but that's high for Canada.[ Spoiler ]
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
Nice, polite, and peaceful my hoop. And I moved here willingly, go figure.
Again, bear in mind that we're disarmed and damned SHEEP to armed criminals... I miss Northern Ontario where a local cop wouldn't blink twice at a family that hunts, a lot, and only has a .22 and a 20-gauge shotgun registered, yet watches them come home with Moose in the back of the pick-up.
Posted by: Caadium Oct 24 2011, 08:25 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Oct 24 2011, 11:37 AM)
So, just for the lulz, let's "compare our sizes". Recife had last month the lowest number of murders in the last 14 years.
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
[ Spoiler ]
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 24 2011, 12:23 PM)
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. As of September 1st, 29 murders this year so far. Yeah yeah yeah, I know, not high for a world perspective in some places, but that's high for Canada.
Nice, polite, and peaceful my hoop. And I moved here willingly, go figure.
Again, bear in mind that we're disarmed and damned SHEEP to armed criminals... I miss Northern Ontario where a local cop wouldn't blink twice at a family that hunts, a lot, and only has a .22 and a 20-gauge shotgun registered, yet watches them come home with Moose in the back of the pick-up.
Nice, polite, and peaceful my hoop. And I moved here willingly, go figure.
Again, bear in mind that we're disarmed and damned SHEEP to armed criminals... I miss Northern Ontario where a local cop wouldn't blink twice at a family that hunts, a lot, and only has a .22 and a 20-gauge shotgun registered, yet watches them come home with Moose in the back of the pick-up.
Number of murders is far less important than number of murders per capita.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 24 2011, 08:28 PM
~625,200 according to official sources for Winnipeg.
Posted by: Saint Hallow Oct 24 2011, 08:40 PM
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/crime_prevention/crime_statistics.shtml
It's a pleasant surprise to see that NYC has had a sharp decrease in crime since 1990. We've only had a little over 400 murders so far this year!
Posted by: KarmaInferno Oct 25 2011, 01:18 AM
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Oct 24 2011, 03:40 PM)
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/crime_prevention/crime_statistics.shtml
It's a pleasant surprise to see that NYC has had a sharp decrease in crime since 1990. We've only had a little over 400 murders so far this year!
It's a pleasant surprise to see that NYC has had a sharp decrease in crime since 1990. We've only had a little over 400 murders so far this year!
There is a reason Samuel Jackson utters the phrase, "It's Giuliani time!" in the movie Shaft.
-k
Posted by: HunterHerne Oct 25 2011, 01:27 AM
From what I can tell, crime in Canada is on an upswing, except in Ontario, where it is down slightly (they still have roughly half of Canada's total population, and all in southern Ontario, so that's not saying much...), but I live in atlantic Canada, and in Halifax, we have been breaking crime records for the last 3 years.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Oct 25 2011, 03:08 AM
QUOTE (Caadium @ Oct 24 2011, 05:25 PM)
Number of murders is far less important than number of murders per capita.
87,5 murders per group of 100 thousand people as of 2007. It got much higher since then but I can't get any official numbers.
Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 25 2011, 04:25 AM
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Oct 21 2011, 11:39 PM)
Ironically, I live in NYC. This city is known for violence, bloodshed, & generally being an inhospitable place to outsiders. The number of CCW licenses here is TINY. As for which ladies would sign up for these lessons... ironically again, not a lot would I think in this city.
Bah, I grew up in NYC. It's been tame since the mid 90s. And the only reason more people don't own firearms is the powers that be try to block civilian firearm ownership. They'd rather you die for the greater good when attacked.
Posted by: hobgoblin Oct 25 2011, 04:33 AM
QUOTE (Paul @ Oct 24 2011, 04:53 PM)
Nice transition from I carry concealed to large rifle.
The core issue with talking about guns in the english language, as the same word is used from a .22 derringer all the way up to a .50 anti-vehicle rifle (and perhaps beyond).
Posted by: hobgoblin Oct 25 2011, 04:42 AM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 24 2011, 06:52 PM)
The bad news is that, from my understanding, Canada doesn't even have anything near "Castle Laws", and even protecting myself and my family will get me in court for "Assault" at best. But, better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6, as one Veteran told me.
I suspect the outcome will be similar to what was in UK, where the home owner was taken in for questioning and then let go when it was clearly a case of defense.
That is, unless one run into someone in power with a axe to grind. But then those can show up in the strangest of circumstances.
in the end the larger image comes down to statistics. But we humans seems to go off ranting based on samples sizes of one...
Posted by: CanRay Oct 25 2011, 05:16 AM
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Oct 24 2011, 11:33 PM)
The core issue with talking about guns in the english language, as the same word is used from a .22 derringer all the way up to a .50 anti-vehicle rifle (and perhaps beyond).
*Cough* Guns are used by Artillerymen and are mounted on Navy Ships. QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Oct 24 2011, 11:42 PM)
I suspect the outcome will be similar to what was in UK, where the home owner was taken in for questioning and then let go when it was clearly a case of defense.
That is, unless one run into someone in power with a axe to grind. But then those can show up in the strangest of circumstances.
in the end the larger image comes down to statistics. But we humans seems to go off ranting based on samples sizes of one...
Knowing my luck, someone breaks into my place with a shotgun, somehow my family survives, and I get the bloody cop and judge that absolutely hates "Vigilantism"...That is, unless one run into someone in power with a axe to grind. But then those can show up in the strangest of circumstances.
in the end the larger image comes down to statistics. But we humans seems to go off ranting based on samples sizes of one...
"And why did you not phone 911 and wait for the authorities to arrive, Sir?" "Because even if they showed up in five minutes after I gave all the details, that would be ten minutes later than the criminals who had already shown up and subsequently would have blown us away."
Yes, my mouth has always gotten me into trouble. How could you tell?
Posted by: hobgoblin Oct 25 2011, 07:40 AM
And nobody stops to wonder why the person decided to invade someones home. Nah, lets just blast him to red mist and leave it at that. Nobody bothers with the legwork anymore, they just want things to go boom...
And why on earth am i even bothering with yet another dead end gun debate?!
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 25 2011, 01:20 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Oct 25 2011, 01:40 AM)
And nobody stops to wonder why the person decided to invade someones home. Nah, lets just blast him to red mist and leave it at that. Nobody bothers with the legwork anymore, they just want things to go boom...
And why on earth am i even bothering with yet another dead end gun debate?!
And why on earth am i even bothering with yet another dead end gun debate?!
Well, there is no legitimate reason for one person to invade another's home...
A polite knock, on the other hand, does wonders.
Posted by: Blade Oct 25 2011, 01:23 PM
I'm no mod, but... what does this have to do with Shadowrun?
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Oct 25 2011, 01:30 PM
Comparing actual murder rates with the murder rates in the slums of the sixth world?
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 25 2011, 01:34 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Oct 25 2011, 07:30 AM)
Comparing actual murder rates with the murder rates in the slums of the sixth world?
Isn't that what we were doing?
Posted by: pbangarth Oct 25 2011, 01:56 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 25 2011, 08:34 AM)
Isn't that what we were doing?
Heh. Not by a long-gun.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Oct 25 2011, 02:36 PM
So, at one hand you have Recife with a murder rate of 87 per group of 100 thousand and 1.5 million people living in it and it is considered one of the most violent places of Brazil, on the other hand you have Seattle. Let's just say that the Seattle metroplex has half that murder rate but given that the nicest parts of town don't actually have 43 murders per group of 100 thousand people, how much killing do we need in Redmond and Puyallup to reach this average?
"Next stop: Back on topic station!"
Posted by: Sengir Oct 25 2011, 02:50 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 25 2011, 02:20 PM)
Well, there is no legitimate reason for one person to invade another's home...
Some guy called Johnson pays me good money to do it...
OK, mostly it is easier to wait until the house is empty...both IRL an IC. Which is probably why home invasions are quite rare.
Posted by: DamienKnight Oct 25 2011, 03:17 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Oct 24 2011, 11:42 PM)
I suspect the outcome will be similar to what was in UK, where the home owner was taken in for questioning and then let go when it was clearly a case of defense.
That is, unless one run into someone in power with a axe to grind. But then those can show up in the strangest of circumstances.
in the end the larger image comes down to statistics. But we humans seems to go off ranting based on samples sizes of one...
That is, unless one run into someone in power with a axe to grind. But then those can show up in the strangest of circumstances.
in the end the larger image comes down to statistics. But we humans seems to go off ranting based on samples sizes of one...
I had a counter-strike league member from Ontario. His family was attacked by two gunmen outside a theatre in broad daylight after a matinee.
His dad is former Black Watch Canada, their Spec Ops. He disarmed one guy and broke his arm, then used the pistol he took from him to club the other guy unconscious, then field stripped the pistol and waited for the cops.
After 11 hours in a police station he was let go with no charges and a stern warning to not use excessive force when dealing with criminals. While Canada may not have Castle laws, they seem to have a good sense of right and wrong.
also, the guys dad got on our CS forums and posted that he felt like an idiot, attacking two armed men with his family present. In retrospect he feels he shouldve just given them their wallets and they probably wouldve just left, but his instincts kicked in and he attacked them before they said what they wanted.
I personally wish more criminals would get their asses kicked (or shot) when they try even small crimes (like mugging) against random citizens.
In California the guy probably wouldve gotten arrested, but in Texas or Tennessee he wouldve been given a medal
Posted by: DamienKnight Oct 25 2011, 03:26 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Oct 24 2011, 02:37 PM)
So, just for the lulz, let's "compare our sizes". Recife had last month the lowest number of murders in the last 14 years.
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
[ Spoiler ]
And it just left the top 3 most dangerous capitals of Brazil.
Which is your town and what is its number?
Jackson TN
0.11 murders per 1000 comes out to just 11 murders per 100k. I guess we are small fish here. More than twice the national average, but nothing compared to your Brazil cesspools
We do have quite a few cooks. The two idiots who blogged about how they were going to kill Obama were from around here. In fact about three months before they were arrested one of them applied at my company for an IT job. His interview was with our head of Support, who is Black. Apparently the wierdo did not act racist at all, but their interview took them to lunch where the guy showed our Head of Support his scoped rifle in the trunk of his car.
Glad we didnt hire him... kinda looks bad for a company if their employees get arrested for shooting sprees and Presidential Assassination conspiracies.
Posted by: Kirk Oct 25 2011, 03:46 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 25 2011, 09:20 AM)
Well, there is no legitimate reason for one person to invade another's home...
A polite knock, on the other hand, does wonders.
A polite knock, on the other hand, does wonders.
Demonstrating that you haven't been keeping up with reality.
In the US, if your door is busted down by an armed intruder then 9 out of 10 times (2007, no-knock entry warrants issued vs crime reports of armed intruders) they're the police. While exact numbers are hard to get, at least 2% and as much as 20% of the time the police have entered the wrong place.
If you shoot a policeman who has entered the wrong home on a no-knock entry, you will go to prison. At least, assuming your case follows the precedence of all those that have happened already.
Posted by: Kirk Oct 25 2011, 03:51 PM
Applying a large hammer to bring my last post onto SR the game...
This has ramifications for when people enter your home in SR. Does KE require a warrant? Does it require a specialized warrant for a no-knock or knock-and-enter?
I submit for working theory that the answer is "yes" in high lifestyle areas, "sometimes" in medium lifestyle, and "no" (or at best "rarely") in all other conditions.
At the same time, the likelihood of violent criminal entry also increases as the lifestyle goes down.
The end result is one more case of catch-22 for the dystopia. The resident should be armed, but needs to figure out darn quick if it's KE or some other large body that /will/ seek retribution, or if it's "just" another gang entry.
Posted by: Caadium Oct 25 2011, 03:51 PM
QUOTE (DamienKnight @ Oct 25 2011, 07:17 AM)
I personally wish more criminals would get their asses kicked (or shot) when they try even small crimes (like mugging) against random citizens.
Be careful that your Shadowrun GM doesn't see that.
QUOTE (DamienKnight @ Oct 25 2011, 07:17 AM)
In California the guy probably wouldve gotten arrested, but in Texas or Tennessee he wouldve been given a medal
I live in California and I know I recently had an experience that leads me to think you might not be too wrong. In short, I was attacked last summer and because of my choice of self-defense, the local DA would not file assault charges on my assailant. Without getting into too much detail, I was fortunate enough to prevent harm to myself as well as my assailant. My assailant was at my home in violation of a restraining order, had already smashed my windshield, and attacked me with a http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ67YpEinJjlz9SbsmILPa-ac082Bv3dQN4z4oiZdpSZs-IqgHs However, my choice to use a sweep and then pin my assailant, instead of a number of harmful techniques I know and train, caused the DA to tell me they couldn't take that to a Jury. In the end, my assailant agreed to plead guilty to violating the restraining order, and is supposed to reimburse me for the windshield; cash I'll never see.
On one hand, the courts actions made me really wish I had made more aggressive choices when defending myself so that at least there would have been some ramifications for my assailant. On the other hand, as you said, I'd likely have wound up in jail for defending myself from assault with a deadly weapon.
Bringing this back to SR, loop holes and location specifics are great tools for both a GM and PCs.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 25 2011, 04:18 PM
QUOTE (Kirk @ Oct 25 2011, 10:46 AM)
Demonstrating that you haven't been keeping up with reality.
In the US, if your door is busted down by an armed intruder then 9 out of 10 times (2007, no-knock entry warrants issued vs crime reports of armed intruders) they're the police. While exact numbers are hard to get, at least 2% and as much as 20% of the time the police have entered the wrong place.
If you shoot a policeman who has entered the wrong home on a no-knock entry, you will go to prison. At least, assuming your case follows the precedence of all those that have happened already.
Which leaves the question: What's the difference between a Gang Robbing your house and a No-Knock Raid?In the US, if your door is busted down by an armed intruder then 9 out of 10 times (2007, no-knock entry warrants issued vs crime reports of armed intruders) they're the police. While exact numbers are hard to get, at least 2% and as much as 20% of the time the police have entered the wrong place.
If you shoot a policeman who has entered the wrong home on a no-knock entry, you will go to prison. At least, assuming your case follows the precedence of all those that have happened already.
OK, heading into politics. But it does leave a very big question that does pertain to Shadowrun...
Do the AA+ Megas have to announce that they're "Cops" or "Security Forces" when performing a legal raid? The Phone Police in Shadowrun are very tactical! And you better believe that not paying your Doc Wagon bill involves some really heavy "Collection Agents".
Posted by: Caadium Oct 25 2011, 04:29 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 25 2011, 08:18 AM)
Do the AA+ Megas have to announce that they're "Cops" or "Security Forces" when performing a legal raid? The Phone Police in Shadowrun are very tactical! And you better believe that not paying your Doc Wagon bill involves some really heavy "Collection Agents".
Given the nature of extraterritoiality I would think that its often in a corps best interest not to announce that they are raiding a place they don't own. Of course, if they own it, they make the rules regarding raids.
So, in either case I say, no they don't announce themselves.
Besides, isn't that usually a job for a Shadowrunner team?
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 25 2011, 04:37 PM
QUOTE (Kirk @ Oct 25 2011, 09:46 AM)
Demonstrating that you haven't been keeping up with reality.
In the US, if your door is busted down by an armed intruder then 9 out of 10 times (2007, no-knock entry warrants issued vs crime reports of armed intruders) they're the police. While exact numbers are hard to get, at least 2% and as much as 20% of the time the police have entered the wrong place.
If you shoot a policeman who has entered the wrong home on a no-knock entry, you will go to prison. At least, assuming your case follows the precedence of all those that have happened already.
In the US, if your door is busted down by an armed intruder then 9 out of 10 times (2007, no-knock entry warrants issued vs crime reports of armed intruders) they're the police. While exact numbers are hard to get, at least 2% and as much as 20% of the time the police have entered the wrong place.
If you shoot a policeman who has entered the wrong home on a no-knock entry, you will go to prison. At least, assuming your case follows the precedence of all those that have happened already.
Actually, that is not entirely correct (Shooting a policeman for entering the wrong house)...
I keep up just fine. If the cops broke down the wrong door, their warrant is invalid (wrong door after all) and they can be shot. At least in the states where I choose to live, anyways. You may have some issues, but you will likely not go to jail. The cops would be wrong in that (very specific) sitiation that you describe (Which happens even less than you may think).
Posted by: CanRay Oct 25 2011, 04:49 PM
QUOTE (Caadium @ Oct 25 2011, 11:29 AM)
Besides, isn't that usually a job for a Shadowrunner team?
Not for a legitimate and legal act. That's why they have Sec-Teams so heavily kitted out.Shadowrunners are for stuff that is illegal, immoral, both, or is likely to look bad on the Whatever O'Clock News.
Repossessing a cyberlimb from someone who hasn't paid their bill? Sec-Team.
Repossessing a Type-O Heart from Granny in the middle of a Residential Zone, Shadowrunners.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 25 2011, 06:20 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 25 2011, 09:49 AM)
Repossessing a Type-O Heart from Granny in the middle of a Residential Zone, Shadowrunners.
You are indeed Heartless, Canray...
Posted by: darthmord Oct 25 2011, 06:56 PM
QUOTE (ravensmuse @ Oct 21 2011, 08:50 PM)
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/3167/006ghy.jpg
Thoughts ladies? Gents? People who like to carry concealed weapons?
Thoughts ladies? Gents? People who like to carry concealed weapons?
Fastest growing population segment in the US that gets a CHP/CWP is women. Many gun shops that offer the courses find 60+% of the signups are women. When my wife & I took our class a few years ago, there were 12 people, only 4 guys (counting me).
I know this might get feathers ruffled but if you openly carry (where legal), the almost universal response of anyone thinking of being a bad guy is to look for another target upon seeing the openly carried (in a holster) firearm. Heck, doing so prevented me from getting mugged at an ATM. The bad guy (who was sneaking up on me) immediately ran off once he saw I was carrying. He kept looking back as he ran away to see if I was going to chase or shoot him.
The FBI has done studies and found that criminals prefer their victims to be unarmed so as minimize the criminal's chances of being hurt while committing the crime. Doesn't bother me in the slightest if the person next to me is armed. I'm usually armed myself.
Disarmament is much like Prohibition... a lot of hot air and still ignored.
As for how the law looks at things, like in real life, SR Law will vary by the country & corporation. I can see the UCAS & CAS still holding to the same general principles held in those areas today. I can see Seattle mimicking modern day with the PTB trying to restrict firearms, perhaps were even successful in recent SR history.
PS: executing a no-knock warrant on my house will result in people getting shot. I would be obligated to defend my wife & children against unknown assailants. Besides in VA, invading a home at night is considered to be done so with lethal intent. Doing so during the day just means you want to rob me. Go figure eh?
Posted by: Sengir Oct 25 2011, 07:01 PM
QUOTE (darthmord @ Oct 25 2011, 07:56 PM)
Fastest growing population segment in the US that gets a CHP/CWP is women.
Sure, why else do you think such ads are done? Because gun merchants dream of lower crime rates?
Posted by: CanRay Oct 25 2011, 07:14 PM
QUOTE (darthmord @ Oct 25 2011, 01:56 PM)
The FBI has done studies and found that criminals prefer their victims to be unarmed so as minimize the criminal's chances of being hurt while committing the crime. Doesn't bother me in the slightest if the person next to me is armed. I'm usually armed myself.
I could have done the study for a tenth the price, a hundredth the time, and came up with the exact same answer."I want a safe work environment, so when I'm raping and robbing people in their own homes, I want to be sure they don't have any weapons at all. After all, that's my 'workplace'. You slow down for road construction workers to keep them safe, disarm yourselves to keep me safe. It's only responsible, after all, I have rights you know."
*Headdesk* Damn, my cynicism is getting to ME now. Either that, or it's because I just watched "Dirty Harry" recently.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 25 2011, 01:20 PM)
You are indeed Heartless, Canray...
No, GRANNY is Heartless. Now.
Posted by: pbangarth Oct 26 2011, 05:29 AM
I don't get it. If I have a firearm, and I want to criminally interact with another citizen who is similarly armed, but holstered, why would his weapon frighten me off? Wouldn't I just wait till his back is turned and shoot him before he can draw his own weapon? Seems like the logical thing to do, in RL or SR.
Posted by: Faraday Oct 26 2011, 06:27 AM
QUOTE (pbangarth @ Oct 25 2011, 10:29 PM)
I don't get it. If I have a firearm, and I want to criminally interact with another citizen who is similarly armed, but holstered, why would his weapon frighten me off? Wouldn't I just wait till his back is turned and shoot him before he can draw his own weapon? Seems like the logical thing to do, in RL or SR.
Well, most criminals aren't out to kill someone, they're out to get money/valuables/etc.Intimidating an unarmed citizen with a gun is a lot less risky than attempting to shoot an armed one and hope they are disabled/dead before they can respond.
Also, police forces generally spend fewer resources looking for a mugger than a killer.
Posted by: Caadium Oct 26 2011, 06:42 AM
QUOTE (Faraday @ Oct 25 2011, 10:27 PM)
Well, most criminals aren't out to kill someone, they're out to get money/valuables/etc.
Intimidating an unarmed citizen with a gun is a lot less risky than attempting to shoot an armed one and hope they are disabled/dead before they can respond.
Also, police forces generally spend fewer resources looking for a mugger than a killer.
Intimidating an unarmed citizen with a gun is a lot less risky than attempting to shoot an armed one and hope they are disabled/dead before they can respond.
Also, police forces generally spend fewer resources looking for a mugger than a killer.
That doesn't even take into account morals. Just because a person is willing to steal from another human, doesn't mean they want to commit murder.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Oct 26 2011, 11:59 AM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 25 2011, 04:14 PM)
No, GRANNY is Heartless. Now.
Pun Police! Freeze, scumbag! You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of fun. You have the right to speak to a comediant. If you cannot afford a comediant, one will be appointed for you.
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Oct 26 2011, 01:10 PM
QUOTE (Caadium @ Oct 26 2011, 08:42 AM)
That doesn't even take into account morals. Just because a person is willing to steal from another human, doesn't mean they want to commit murder.
Meh, I think there must be a statistic somewhere that people defending their homes with a potentially lethal response have a higher chance of in turn getting shot/killed by an intruder.
On the other hand, I do understand where the sentiment is coming from. Statistically, it might be safer to not defend yourself, because that way you might lose your stuff, but not your life, BUT in those cases where the loss of life was the goal, then being able to defend sure seems like a better alternative.
Now IMHO the best argument for gun control is stilll that, in all those areas where the general crime rate is low, your gun-toting spouse is the most likely person to kill you.
The other is that a violent response to a violent crime could very well trigger another violent response from another person who believes that in fact the initial response was the crime itself.
For instance: assume you are armed on a street and hear a shooting, with likely as not several shooters, around the corner. Then a guy with a gun in hand comes running around the corner. What do you do?
Posted by: EKBT81 Oct 26 2011, 01:19 PM
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Oct 26 2011, 03:10 PM)
On the other hand, I do understand where the sentiment is coming from. Statistically, it might be safer to not defend yourself, because that way you might lose your stuff, but not your life, BUT in those cases where the loss of life was the goal, then being able to defend sure seems like a better alternative.
Now IMHO the best argument for gun control is stilll that, in all those areas where the general crime rate is low, your gun-toting spouse is the most likely person to kill you.
Now IMHO the best argument for gun control is stilll that, in all those areas where the general crime rate is low, your gun-toting spouse is the most likely person to kill you.
IIRC there's an FBI statistic that self-defense with a firearm is actually the safest response, then compliance and then (much less safe) self defense with means other than firearms.
Also, wouldn't people who want to kill their significant other just choose other devices in the absence of guns, e.g the old-fashioned kitchen knife? I guess the gun is in most cases the means, not the cause.
Posted by: Kirk Oct 26 2011, 02:19 PM
QUOTE (EKBT81 @ Oct 26 2011, 09:19 AM)
IIRC there's an FBI statistic that self-defense with a firearm is actually the safest response, then compliance and then (much less safe) self defense with means other than firearms.
Also, wouldn't people who want to kill their significant other just choose other devices in the absence of guns, e.g the old-fashioned kitchen knife? I guess the gun is in most cases the means, not the cause.
Also, wouldn't people who want to kill their significant other just choose other devices in the absence of guns, e.g the old-fashioned kitchen knife? I guess the gun is in most cases the means, not the cause.
No, there's not an FBI statistic of that. It's afrequently claimed stat of gun supporters, the statistical support of it has some serious problems, and debating it will take this way off topic and maybe bring up moderator response. So leave it as "maybe".
On the other hand, the FBI does track weapons used for murders. Approximately 50% of husbands and 60% of wives used firearms. (actual number +/- 3%, 1982-1999) About 20% of men use knives instead, and about 25% beat (with fists) or kick their wives to death. Roughly 35% of women used knives. The remaining 5% (both sides) are bats and skillets and run over with cars and poison and all that sort of thing.
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Oct 26 2011, 03:02 PM
Heh, firearms promote gender equality in spousicide, that's nice, at least.
In Shadowrun I would definitely recommend everyone to get a gun, because you have reliable non-lethal ammo that will still get the job done.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 26 2011, 04:34 PM
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Oct 26 2011, 10:02 AM)
In Shadowrun I would definitely recommend everyone to get a gun, because you have reliable non-lethal ammo that will still get the job done.
It's never come up in-game, but I've already ruled in my own head that having "Less Than Lethal Ammunition" (Gel Rounds, Stick 'n' Shock) in a firearm in the UCAS is taken heavily into consideration by the police responders, possibly just to the point of taking a statement in a similar vein as having used a Taser.Regular ammunition will make them a little harsher on the person doing the shooting, hauled down to the interrogation room for questioning and statement taking. It's "Lethal", but with armoured clothing being so prevalent it's understandable. Also, you might not be able to afford the more expensive Low Lethality rounds.
Outright lethal rounds (Hi-Ex, EX-Ex, APDS) will get you hauled in, and you better hope you're a SINner so you can have a Lawyer present to explain to the nice police officers why you have such ammo. And, if it ever goes to a court case, is considered proof of "Premeditation" for attempted murder or actual murder depending on the outcome.
I also have the "Five-Day Waiting Period" for pistols at legitimate shops, but with Gun
Posted by: Caadium Oct 26 2011, 05:53 PM
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Oct 26 2011, 05:10 AM)
Meh, I think there must be a statistic somewhere that people defending their homes with a potentially lethal response have a higher chance of in turn getting shot/killed by an intruder.
On the other hand, I do understand where the sentiment is coming from. Statistically, it might be safer to not defend yourself, because that way you might lose your stuff, but not your life, BUT in those cases where the loss of life was the goal, then being able to defend sure seems like a better alternative.
Now IMHO the best argument for gun control is stilll that, in all those areas where the general crime rate is low, your gun-toting spouse is the most likely person to kill you.
The other is that a violent response to a violent crime could very well trigger another violent response from another person who believes that in fact the initial response was the crime itself.
For instance: assume you are armed on a street and hear a shooting, with likely as not several shooters, around the corner. Then a guy with a gun in hand comes running around the corner. What do you do?
On the other hand, I do understand where the sentiment is coming from. Statistically, it might be safer to not defend yourself, because that way you might lose your stuff, but not your life, BUT in those cases where the loss of life was the goal, then being able to defend sure seems like a better alternative.
Now IMHO the best argument for gun control is stilll that, in all those areas where the general crime rate is low, your gun-toting spouse is the most likely person to kill you.
The other is that a violent response to a violent crime could very well trigger another violent response from another person who believes that in fact the initial response was the crime itself.
For instance: assume you are armed on a street and hear a shooting, with likely as not several shooters, around the corner. Then a guy with a gun in hand comes running around the corner. What do you do?
My post was not referring to a person defending their home. But rather to the earlier statement that basically equated all criminals to killers. My point was that just because someone is a criminal does not mean that they are ready to cross that line. Even a criminal that is carrying a firearm that they plan to use in their crime, such as armed robbery.
When it comes to self defense people tend to act based on instincts and are less concerned with long therm ramifications at the moment. That changes what they will or won't do in the moment.
Posted by: Warlordtheft Oct 26 2011, 06:12 PM
QUOTE (Caadium @ Oct 26 2011, 01:53 PM)
My post was not referring to a person defending their home. But rather to the earlier statement that basically equated all criminals to killers. My point was that just because someone is a criminal does not mean that they are ready to cross that line. Even a criminal that is carrying a firearm that they plan to use in their crime, such as armed robbery.
Point being the victim does not know the criminals intent. Is it to rob, rape and kill? Or just a few of those? And would a criminal lie about his/her intentions?
Back OT---My guess is that the corps would use runners for unannounced visits where the legal costs outweigh the cost of just hiring runners to dump the person at a nearby corporate facility (or mutually agreed location). Usually in the low life style areas or worse. Those jobs of course would be more like bounty hunting than shadowrunning.
Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 27 2011, 07:23 PM
I see potential in an urban bounty hunter game. It could be like SWAT 2 where you manage your own SWAT team.
Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 28 2011, 02:43 AM
to respond to theo riginal idea,
I'm a woman
I RL have a concealed carry permit
I carry.
I go to the range regulalry. if I'm going to carry a weapon I requiremyself to be proficent with it. anything less is irresponsible.
I've commented in enough threads her that for women the problem is less carrying a weapon than it is having some where to carry as our fashion is not as accomadating as men's clothing.
I live in Pennsylvania now which is very gun friendly and it is hard to get liquor. I use to live in NY where it is easy to get a drink and hard to get a gun, as others have discussed.
my standard line has been:
New York would rather have you drunk than armed.
PA would rather have you armed than drunk. I'm a New Yorker.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 28 2011, 02:59 AM
Sorry Snow Fox, I really derailed us this time.
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Oct 28 2011, 08:52 AM
QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Oct 28 2011, 04:43 AM)
to respond to theo riginal idea,
I'm a woman
I RL have a concealed carry permit
I carry.
I go to the range regulalry. if I'm going to carry a weapon I requiremyself to be proficent with it. anything less is irresponsible.
I've commented in enough threads her that for women the problem is less carrying a weapon than it is having some where to carry as our fashion is not as accomadating as men's clothing.
I'm a woman
I RL have a concealed carry permit
I carry.
I go to the range regulalry. if I'm going to carry a weapon I requiremyself to be proficent with it. anything less is irresponsible.
I've commented in enough threads her that for women the problem is less carrying a weapon than it is having some where to carry as our fashion is not as accomadating as men's clothing.
You needz the elan with stick&shock
.
Posted by: Sengir Oct 28 2011, 10:34 AM
What people tend to forget when discussing the deterrence value of small arms: Guns are portable valuables. Flashing your modded Predator (or expensive cyber, drones, foci...) might scare off some gangers, but it might also give them ideas about taking said weapon from your cold, dead hands.
Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 28 2011, 02:42 PM
QUOTE (Sengir @ Oct 28 2011, 06:34 AM)
What people tend to forget when discussing the deterrence value of small arms: Guns are portable valuables. Flashing your modded Predator (or expensive cyber, drones, foci...) might scare off some gangers, but it might also give them ideas about taking said weapon from your cold, dead hands.
I just had this conversation with someone the other day. If I have a visible firearm I would be prioritized as a target, and if someone is surprise attacking me, he can probably kill me if he plans it out right.
So, when I think about this in relation to role playing games, I guess it means that random gangers attacking player characters would probably prioritize their attacks on whomever appears to be the most heavily armed. As a GM, I think sometimes there's a certain amount of feeling that in order to keep things fair you should have enemies attack all the player characters. But when you think about it, they should probably prioritize whomever looks scariest and try to take that person down as fast as they can.
Posted by: pbangarth Oct 28 2011, 02:48 PM
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Oct 28 2011, 09:42 AM)
But when you think about it, they should probably prioritize whomever looks scariest and try to take that person down as fast as they can.
Absolutely. NPCs are not stupid... well most of them aren't. Take down the worst foe right away, before he can kak you back.This is the way NPCs work in my games.
Posted by: PittsburghRPGA Oct 28 2011, 03:02 PM
QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Oct 27 2011, 09:43 PM)
I RL have a concealed carry permit
I carry.
I go to the range regulalry. if I'm going to carry a weapon I requiremyself to be proficent with it. anything less is irresponsible.
I live in Pennsylvania now which is very gun friendly and it is hard to get liquor. I use to live in NY where it is easy to get a drink and hard to get a gun, as others have discussed.
I carry.
I go to the range regulalry. if I'm going to carry a weapon I requiremyself to be proficent with it. anything less is irresponsible.
I live in Pennsylvania now which is very gun friendly and it is hard to get liquor. I use to live in NY where it is easy to get a drink and hard to get a gun, as others have discussed.
Sadly Snow_Fox, you live on the wrong side of Pennsylvania, or I'd be doing my impression of Slammo! hitting on NetCat.
6 hours (ish) each way is a bit much of a drive even for a gamer girl who shoots. Are you on the PAFOA.org forums too?
Cordially,
Eric
Posted by: HunterHerne Oct 28 2011, 03:24 PM
QUOTE (pbangarth @ Oct 28 2011, 11:48 AM)
Absolutely. NPCs are not stupid... well most of them aren't. Take down the worst foe right away, before he can kak you back.
This is the way NPCs work in my games.
This is the way NPCs work in my games.
Same with mine, but sometimes, you just need to split them. In a recent fight scene my Players got into, I had two grunts on the roof, and the PC mage levitated herself and the adept to the roof. She didn't see the orks, so she dropped the adept right in front of them. I opted that one would distract the adept in melee (Adept had a P-93, grunt had plastic bones), while the other moved away and shot the mage.
Posted by: Caadium Oct 28 2011, 03:40 PM
QUOTE (HunterHerne @ Oct 28 2011, 08:24 AM)
Same with mine, but sometimes, you just need to split them. In a recent fight scene my Players got into, I had two grunts on the roof, and the PC mage levitated herself and the adept to the roof. She didn't see the orks, so she dropped the adept right in front of them. I opted that one would distract the adept in melee (Adept had a P-93, grunt had plastic bones), while the other moved away and shot the mage.
It's also important to remember that different NPCs will evaluate the level of threat posed by PCs differently. Without cyberscanners handy, or assensing the PCs all the time, NPC groups will be left to judge based on the actions and appearances of the PCs.
Not to mention, different NPCs will use different tactics anyway. One group might think, "Geek the small squishy guys first so we can concentrate on the big tough things." Others might use the, "Kill that fraggin' Troll now," mentality. Or any number of other options.
I find that in most situations the PCs help me to determine the target based on rough ideas I've got for the NPCs. That gives them tactics appropriate to the NPC group, but also keeps the PCs from knowing what to always expect.
Posted by: darthmord Oct 28 2011, 05:09 PM
In Real Life, the bad guys typically choose another target if their first target is armed.
Why?
Because if they miss / screw up, they will be the target, typically of the person they tried to shoot and/or that person's friends.
Again, it's safer (and less risky) to go after unarmed opponents or ones who don't look like they can be threatening if armed.
Posted by: HunterHerne Oct 28 2011, 06:08 PM
QUOTE (darthmord @ Oct 28 2011, 02:09 PM)
In Real Life, the bad guys typically choose another target if their first target is armed.
Why?
Because if they miss / screw up, they will be the target, typically of the person they tried to shoot and/or that person's friends.
Again, it's safer (and less risky) to go after unarmed opponents or ones who don't look like they can be threatening if armed.
Why?
Because if they miss / screw up, they will be the target, typically of the person they tried to shoot and/or that person's friends.
Again, it's safer (and less risky) to go after unarmed opponents or ones who don't look like they can be threatening if armed.
Doesn't always apply, though. Sometimes you want to send a message, so you go after the toughest group around. Otherwise, yeah, it makes the most sense to go after the softest target you can.
And doesn't apply at all if they are attackign you. Then you hit the toughest and most dangerous SOB and be done with it.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 28 2011, 06:14 PM
QUOTE (PittsburghRPGA @ Oct 28 2011, 10:02 AM)
Sadly Snow_Fox, you live on the wrong side of Pennsylvania, or I'd be doing my impression of Slammo! hitting on NetCat.
You'd offer to take her on a date unless she was already seeing the toaster?QUOTE (HunterHerne @ Oct 28 2011, 01:08 PM)
Doesn't always apply, though. Sometimes you want to send a message, so you go after the toughest group around.
Like beating up the biggest mo'fo in a prison yard?
Posted by: HunterHerne Oct 28 2011, 06:16 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 28 2011, 03:14 PM)
Like beating up the biggest mo'fo in a prison yard?
Pretty much, yeah. Once he goes down, either everyone hits you and you don't live long enough to care, or everyone backs off.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 28 2011, 06:42 PM
Mental Note: Don't go to prison.
Additional: Stop writing and speaking out mental notes.
Posted by: pbangarth Oct 28 2011, 06:50 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 28 2011, 01:42 PM)
Mental Note: Don't go to prison.
Best advice you can give yourself.
Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 28 2011, 07:12 PM
QUOTE (darthmord @ Oct 28 2011, 01:09 PM)
In Real Life, the bad guys typically choose another target if their first target is armed.
Why?
Because if they miss / screw up, they will be the target, typically of the person they tried to shoot and/or that person's friends.
Again, it's safer (and less risky) to go after unarmed opponents or ones who don't look like they can be threatening if armed.
Why?
Because if they miss / screw up, they will be the target, typically of the person they tried to shoot and/or that person's friends.
Again, it's safer (and less risky) to go after unarmed opponents or ones who don't look like they can be threatening if armed.
Yeah, but in your game that would translate to them not attacking the player characters. If they do attack the player characters, it wouldn't make sense to pile on the Face while the big cybered guys with enormous firearms shoot you in the back of the head.
Posted by: ravensmuse Oct 28 2011, 10:29 PM
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Oct 28 2011, 09:42 AM)
I just had this conversation with someone the other day. If I have a visible firearm I would be prioritized as a target, and if someone is surprise attacking me, he can probably kill me if he plans it out right.
So, when I think about this in relation to role playing games, I guess it means that random gangers attacking player characters would probably prioritize their attacks on whomever appears to be the most heavily armed. As a GM, I think sometimes there's a certain amount of feeling that in order to keep things fair you should have enemies attack all the player characters. But when you think about it, they should probably prioritize whomever looks scariest and try to take that person down as fast as they can.
So, when I think about this in relation to role playing games, I guess it means that random gangers attacking player characters would probably prioritize their attacks on whomever appears to be the most heavily armed. As a GM, I think sometimes there's a certain amount of feeling that in order to keep things fair you should have enemies attack all the player characters. But when you think about it, they should probably prioritize whomever looks scariest and try to take that person down as fast as they can.
Kind of building off of this post, I've been reading the Aztlan book of late and I've hit the section where they talk about carrying in Aztlan proper. Keep in mind that this is for 2055 or so, so it's a little dated...
The general idea there seems to be that sure, you can carry whatever you want, but there are two things that work against you: the cops will probably be carrying gear manlier than what you're carrying, and they're not afraid to escalate and thusly, kill nearby civvies. Cause Aztlan law says all of the collateral damage is your fault.
Kind of puts a damper on the joy in toting around a mini-gun, doesn't it?
Posted by: Daylen Oct 28 2011, 10:34 PM
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Oct 28 2011, 02:42 PM)
I just had this conversation with someone the other day. If I have a visible firearm I would be prioritized as a target, and if someone is surprise attacking me, he can probably kill me if he plans it out right.
So, when I think about this in relation to role playing games, I guess it means that random gangers attacking player characters would probably prioritize their attacks on whomever appears to be the most heavily armed. As a GM, I think sometimes there's a certain amount of feeling that in order to keep things fair you should have enemies attack all the player characters. But when you think about it, they should probably prioritize whomever looks scariest and try to take that person down as fast as they can.
So, when I think about this in relation to role playing games, I guess it means that random gangers attacking player characters would probably prioritize their attacks on whomever appears to be the most heavily armed. As a GM, I think sometimes there's a certain amount of feeling that in order to keep things fair you should have enemies attack all the player characters. But when you think about it, they should probably prioritize whomever looks scariest and try to take that person down as fast as they can.
Documented incidents indicate that for the most part criminals simply choose another target, sometimes much later as well because it takes time to get back into the right frame of mind. In places like chicago/detroit there have been incidents where police have been targeted for their weapons; but so far I have yet to hear about any nonLEOs targeted as such.
IRL I OC at times, but in game I would never OC and don't understand why anyone would. It brings attention from law enforcement in basically every area that SR normally happens and what PC wants LEOs asking for his SIN and licenses and permits (whether needed or not).
Posted by: Daylen Oct 28 2011, 10:36 PM
QUOTE (ravensmuse @ Oct 28 2011, 10:29 PM)
Kind of building off of this post, I've been reading the Aztlan book of late and I've hit the section where they talk about carrying in Aztlan proper. Keep in mind that this is for 2055 or so, so it's a little dated...
The general idea there seems to be that sure, you can carry whatever you want, but there are two things that work against you: the cops will probably be carrying gear manlier than what you're carrying, and they're not afraid to escalate and thusly, kill nearby civvies. Cause Aztlan law says all of the collateral damage is your fault.
Kind of puts a damper on the joy in toting around a mini-gun, doesn't it?
The general idea there seems to be that sure, you can carry whatever you want, but there are two things that work against you: the cops will probably be carrying gear manlier than what you're carrying, and they're not afraid to escalate and thusly, kill nearby civvies. Cause Aztlan law says all of the collateral damage is your fault.
Kind of puts a damper on the joy in toting around a mini-gun, doesn't it?
Talk about a 180, from no carry to anything goes!
Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 29 2011, 02:07 AM
In rl most street meat criminals see a gun as posturing to be repsonded to. If you point a weapon at them they will most likely not back down, they aren't that smart, but see it as a challenge to me met, so if you're going to draw, do it with the full knowledge you're going to pull the trigger, anything else, and you're an idiot. In my years carrying I've had my hand on the gun a couple of times. I've drawn it twice. The person each time was unaware of their danger but they were in that zone that I was ready. I've never had to point it at someone.
The saving grace is that most street meat go gangers aren't very good shots. Look at the news when idiots hit bystanders because they can't shoot straight and so on.
Posted by: pbangarth Oct 29 2011, 02:15 AM
QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Oct 28 2011, 09:07 PM)
The saving grace is that most street meat go gangers aren't very good shots. Look at the news when idiots hit bystanders because they can't shoot straight and so on.
Heh. Saving grace for the intended target. Not so much for the bystander.
Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 29 2011, 02:20 AM
Since I'm assuming I'm the intended target....
Posted by: CanRay Oct 29 2011, 02:48 AM
QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Oct 28 2011, 09:07 PM)
The saving grace is that most street meat go gangers aren't very good shots. Look at the news when idiots hit bystanders because they can't shoot straight and so on.
http://youtu.be/aQk_wXNN_hISo have to see if I still have the DVD of this movie.
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Oct 30 2011, 01:26 PM
QUOTE (Daylen @ Oct 29 2011, 12:34 AM)
IRL I OC at times, but in game I would never OC and don't understand why anyone would. It brings attention from law enforcement in basically every area that SR normally happens and what PC wants LEOs asking for his SIN and licenses and permits (whether needed or not).
Oh, you definitely should OC in redmond. The Alpha or the Minigun
.Actually, no, you wear an expensive suit and carry a teeny gun while a click or so above you your chameleon coated zep is watching over you with a full-auto grenade launcher
.
Posted by: HunterHerne Oct 30 2011, 02:37 PM
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Oct 30 2011, 10:26 AM)
Oh, you definitely should OC in redmond. The Alpha or the Minigun .
Actually, no, you wear an expensive suit and carry a teeny gun while a click or so above you your chameleon coated zep is watching over you with a full-auto grenade launcher.
.Actually, no, you wear an expensive suit and carry a teeny gun while a click or so above you your chameleon coated zep is watching over you with a full-auto grenade launcher
.and if some hitman with a knife comes up to you, you are stuck in melee with drone overwatch potentially blowing you away with said grenade launcher.
Posted by: Daylen Oct 31 2011, 12:57 AM
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Oct 30 2011, 02:26 PM)
Oh, you definitely should OC in redmond. The Alpha or the Minigun .
Actually, no, you wear an expensive suit and carry a teeny gun while a click or so above you your chameleon coated zep is watching over you with a full-auto grenade launcher.
.Actually, no, you wear an expensive suit and carry a teeny gun while a click or so above you your chameleon coated zep is watching over you with a full-auto grenade launcher
.Just one? I usually try to have three: a holdout pistol for maximum conceal and just in case, a light pistol for decent conceal and use when I need people to think I'm unarmed, and a heavy pistol as a primary when I don't have to worry about being searched for weapons or when I need to hand over a weapon. If I were to go in Redmond it would be with my trusty M1A, top rifle damage and a 20 cartridge magazine. Doesn't everyone OC in the barrens if forced to go there?
Posted by: Faraday Oct 31 2011, 08:19 AM
Not OCing in the barrens is like OCing most anywhere else in public. It attracts attention that you usually don't want.
Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Oct 31 2011, 10:03 AM
QUOTE (HunterHerne @ Oct 30 2011, 04:37 PM)
and if some hitman with a knife comes up to you, you are stuck in melee with drone overwatch potentially blowing you away with said grenade launcher.
Oh, come on, what happened to old-fashioned negotiation? If the guy brings a knife to a gun fight you reason with him that if he sticks close to you then very soon both of you will be blown to a fine red mist, and he would be far better off just making peace.
QUOTE
Just one? I usually try to have three: a holdout pistol for maximum conceal and just in case, a light pistol for decent conceal and use when I need people to think I'm unarmed, and a heavy pistol as a primary when I don't have to worry about being searched for weapons or when I need to hand over a weapon. If I were to go in Redmond it would be with my trusty M1A, top rifle damage and a 20 cartridge magazine. Doesn't everyone OC in the barrens if forced to go there?
I think somehow the idea of the "boot gun" somehow hasn't yet taken hold in our game group(s). People might have a secondary gun - usually an Hpist in addition to the rifle.
One more case for openly carrying the big guns is when the shit is actually going down: You CC a pistol during legwork, etc, but when the run goes down then usually the gloves come off and the chameleon coated assault rifle is carried openly - since after all, if you're obviously intruding, what's the point of concealing your gun? If someone finds you, then it obviously doesn't matter anymore. Obviously this doesn't happen during infiltration via impersonation runs.
Posted by: ravensmuse Oct 31 2011, 10:40 AM
So Tehana was browsing the web last night doing research and came across this http://www.net-a-porter.com/product/48187.
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS449US449&gcx=c&q=alexander+mcqueen+knuckleduster+purse&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1440&bih=785&sei=%2073quTpOWNtT2sQLy0dyTDw.
Posted by: tehana Oct 31 2011, 12:58 PM
QUOTE (ravensmuse @ Oct 31 2011, 10:40 AM)
So Tehana was browsing the web last night doing research and came across this http://www.net-a-porter.com/product/48187.
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS449US449&gcx=c&q=alexander+mcqueen+knuckleduster+purse&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1440&bih=785&sei=%2073quTpOWNtT2sQLy0dyTDw.
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS449US449&gcx=c&q=alexander+mcqueen+knuckleduster+purse&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1440&bih=785&sei=%2073quTpOWNtT2sQLy0dyTDw.
Yes. But the issue is that the McQueen is too small to hold a pistol. I'm on the lookout for a hard clutch large enough to hold one and will fashion my own knuckleduster on.
http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs8/i/2005/289/a/f/louis_vuitton_murakami_sks_by_peter_gronquist.jpg. It's totally label whore but I think its oddly fantastic in some bizarre way. I will create a character some day that needs a Murakami emblazoned gun.
Posted by: Daylen Oct 31 2011, 03:48 PM
QUOTE (tehana @ Oct 31 2011, 12:58 PM)
Yes. But the issue is that the McQueen is too small to hold a pistol. I'm on the lookout for a hard clutch large enough to hold one and will fashion my own knuckleduster on.
http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs8/i/2005/289/a/f/louis_vuitton_murakami_sks_by_peter_gronquist.jpg. It's totally label whore but I think its oddly fantastic in some bizarre way. I will create a character some day that needs a Murakami emblazoned gun.
http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs8/i/2005/289/a/f/louis_vuitton_murakami_sks_by_peter_gronquist.jpg. It's totally label whore but I think its oddly fantastic in some bizarre way. I will create a character some day that needs a Murakami emblazoned gun.
That causes me almost as much pain as http://blog.riflegear.com/archive/2007/12/26/hello-kitty-ar-15---evil-black-rifle-meets-cute-and.aspx
Posted by: tehana Oct 31 2011, 04:02 PM
QUOTE (Daylen @ Oct 31 2011, 03:48 PM)
That causes me almost as much pain as http://blog.riflegear.com/archive/2007/12/26/hello-kitty-ar-15---evil-black-rifle-meets-cute-and.aspx
I will fully admit in public that I am a total Hello Kitty nut. My desk is absolutely covered and if I had my way I'd have most of my kitchen and bathroom done as well (Damn you Ravensmuse!). The most painful part of that rifle is how terribly done the Hello Kitty is. Seriously it reminds me of the cheap Hello Kitty knock off stuff you find in Chinatown. I don't know why you'd ruin a perfectly good gun with a crappy graphic design job.
Posted by: CanRay Oct 31 2011, 05:28 PM
http://youtu.be/XKC8jISK5Os
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)