this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2025
8 points (100.0% liked)

Liberal Gun Owners

961 readers
1 users here now

A community for pro-gun liberals.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DoctorWhookah@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I’m all for it. If you truly want home defense: shotgun. I like all firearms in the hands of liberals though. Why shouldn’t we have them? The right does.

[–] Twinklebreeze@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's the only way to get any gun control legislation. Why would the right ban guns when only they have them? The more liberal, queer, and black/brown people have guns the more willing repubs will be to take them.

[–] SoftTeeth@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Facts, the most sensible gun legislation in this country's history came after the Black Panthers formed.

[–] kerrigan778@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Honestly shotgun for home defense is not necessarily good advice for many people, racking it to scare people away is terrible advice too, don't give away your location and give up the element of surprise. If they know people are in the house they are invading, assume lethal force is already on the table and don't give them a chance to point and shoot, even if it doesn't hit you it could hit a bystander. Shotguns with buckshot are very heavy recoiling and have serious risk of sending stray pellets through walls and potentially other people, you need to take ownership of the potential of every shot to end a life and a shotgun shoots 9 shots at once in a cone, it's not aiming easy mode unless you live alone in a house with nothing around it and even then the spread isn't enough that you don't have to aim decently.

[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Why a shotgun? Easier to hit I'm assuming, but also more collateral damage

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

Easier to hit in a panic situation. And also shot pellets do not penetrate walls quite as easily as single bullets, so you're less likely to have accidental collateral damage.

[–] thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Pistols put holes in people, rifles put holes through people, and a shotgun will take a chunk off a persons body and spread it over the wall

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Racking a shotgun will also scare most aggressors. It's also simply much more visible to a home intruder. You're more likely not to even need to fire one compared to a hand gun.

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Paul Harrell (RIP Paul) pretty well debunked this, anyone who would be afraid of the shell being loaded would equally be afraid of a weapon being pointed at them, and racking the shell gives them time to react if they truly have hostile intent to warrant a shotgun being pointed at them.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

The point is to telegraph that you have a gun to a home intruder before they get in eye sight. If the intruder doesn't hear it, then the home owner is in the same position as they would be if they hadn't bothered.