[quote][quote][quote][quote][quote]No one is denying that FACT, but do people really need an ARMORY to defend themselves? A glock is sufficient, unless you live in the wild where bear or lion attacks are common, or a third world country.[/quote] It’s not a need, it’s a want. Analogous of “do people really need a black belt or a 5th or 10th etc degree black belt to defend themselves? Isn’t a white or blue etc sufficient? I mean come on, isn’t that excessive? We don’t live in a militaristic society, so martial arts isn’t necessary. Only in violent parts of the world do you need to invest more in martial arts.” Some people like to be more prepared and thorough than others. Who are you to impose that others aren’t allowed to equip and train and prepare themselves to a more thorough degree than you are?[/quote] I get what you are saying, but the two aren't comparable as neatly as your analogy makes it seem. One has the potential to be used to do what had happened at that school and other mass shootings. In the case of the school, the killer would have been neutralized as quickly with a glock as he would have with an ar. In the case of the martial art example, and speaking from someone whose done bjj for the last 5 years, belt degree is more of a status symbol than it is a representation of actual skill. It also has less potential for mass killings. If someone were to go in a killing spree using whatever martial art they practice, they'd have to try real hard to succeed and would be a lot easier to shut down. My point is, what the -blam!- do those with armories think thry are preparing for? What do they think will happen to this world that they will need enough guns to arm a small militia? Surely one rifle, one shotgun and handgun is enough to make him/her feel safe?[/quote] ARs have more stopping power than a handgun. ARs are more accurate as they have longer barrels. ARs have a higher rate of fire. But most leave their big guns at home and carry their smaller arms. That’s because if larger shit hit the fan, you’d probably go home anyways to establish a secure base. BJJ is, though effective in 1 on 1 ground fighting, a pretty shallow and simple style. So, in that case, it’s a status symbol. There are other styles more proficient in being adaptable in many scenarios including facing multiple opponents at once. And black belts and higher degrees, if the school and teachers are good, carry more and actual weight. Why are you concerned with and offended by people who have armories of guns and weapons? What percentage of them actually assault society with their entire armory? Almost or exactly 0%. Why is literally none of your business and your concerns of it are statistically unfounded.[/quote] You're assumimg a lot here pal. First off, you're grossly misinformed about bjj, and I practice in combatives bjj with is a lighter form of Krav Maga more or less. Secondly you assume I'm against guns or offended by those who have armories or think they should be stripped of their collections. No. I own a glock and feel it's perfectly sufficient as far as my weaponry is concerned. I just believe having a armory in the house is literally overkill and don't understand why some feel is necessary. Just because I don't share your views on the subject don't mean I'm inherently agaisnt it. However I do also believe all these, let's say gun enthusiasts, are a bit paranoid bordering on the prepper levels. -edit- Fixed some spelling and grammar errors. Phone is overzealous with autocorrect.[/quote] Lol you definitely have a consistent mindset of mediocrity, even demonstrated in how you study martial arts.

Yeah, just go to your local Walmart and buy a nuke, duh

[quote]Do people honestly think that a,gun is the only way to protect yourself or others? God damn, people are lazy.[/quote] [quote] people are lazy[/quote] As is your thinking