Unpopular Opinion Thread

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Snapdragon

    know-it-all tart
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    36   0   0
    Nov 5, 2013
    39,114
    77
    NW Indiana
    *Every* guy? Really? Every single one?

    I tried to get my wife to shoot everything from 9mm to .40 to .45. She tried several, from among my handguns and my dad's handguns. She didn't like them. The only gun she like shooting was my .22. She has tiny hands, and - more importantly - nerve damage from a since-replaced disk in her neck that prevents her from maintaining a tight grip. A .380 is the only thing she can actually hold and shoot, that is worth carrying.

    So, when we went to buy her a gun, we started with the .380s. She is very happy with her Glock 42, even though I know that I can barely hold the thing, and certainly wouldn't enjoy shooting it. But she does.

    More broadly interpreted, every guy in a LGS who assumes he knows what is appropriate for a woman to shoot is a dumbass, whether it be a pink gun, a .380, or an "idiotproof" revolver.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    11,103
    113
    Avon
    Here are my actual true, mostly unpopular opinions:

    Ruger SR9C is a bad choice, unless you get really lucky.

    Them's fightin' words!

    I suppose I could have gotten really lucky twice now, but my Ruger SR9c was my first handgun purchase and remains my EDC. I like it so much that, when I wanted to get something to take with me when I travel (which I do regularly, for work), I bought a second one.

    Out of curiosity: what are your issues with it?
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    11,103
    113
    Avon
    More broadly interpreted, every guy in a LGS who assumes he knows what is appropriate for a woman to shoot is a dumbass, whether it be a pink gun, a .380, or an "idiotproof" revolver.

    Well now, that one, I can get behind 100%.

    I can just picture someone like Julie Golob walking into a gun store, and some yokel trying to direct her to a "woman" gun. Actually, I'd pay to see that.
     

    possum_128

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Mar 21, 2008
    2,489
    84
    Martinsville area
    Let's see: They are MAGAZINES not clips!
    I refuse to carry any gun with an exposed hammer or a safety
    I hate ar's
    Sabots are "say-bows" not sabaths
    I hate ar's
    Grip safeties will get you killed
    Kel-Tec's are good guns for the money
    And last but not least I hate ar's.
     

    Dhotroddave3

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 13, 2014
    3
    3
    Marion
    I agree, I take mine in anyway! only thing I carry is 3rd gen Smith, actually alloy steel frame 457 stainless is my everyday weapon.
     
    Last edited:

    2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    26,351
    113
    NWI
    Would be nice to discuss some of the actually held opinions, but they seem to be getting lost under the deluge of... implied- purple "opinions".



    Someone carrying a firearm on their person doesn't impact your property rights in any way whatsoever. Also, a natural right remains a natural right, regardless of location. A person retains the right to life, thus the right to defend his life, and therefore the right to keep and bear arms, wherever he is.

    On private property, you certainly have the right to decide who is welcome and who is unwelcome on your property, and thus the issue is being welcome on the property versus trespassing. You can't force someone to disarm; you can only tell them to leave.

    In a public place - including otherwise private property that the owner has opened for public commerce and therefore implicitly invited public persons onto the premises for the purpose of conducting business - I think that trespass must be in response to some interference with the business, and not merely "we don't serve your kind here".

    A "no guns" requirement, in this regard, is no different from a "no blacks" or "no Jews" or "no Irish" requirement.

    OC everywhere. If you are asked to leave, say, I'm Gay / Lesbean do you really want the problems that I can cause?
     

    Squander

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    42   0   0
    Jun 27, 2014
    241
    28
    South Bend
    Here is a comment I see often: I will never live in (or visit) a city/state/country that does not allow me to have my EDC with me at all times.

    Which eliminates most of the world and some well-known places in the US.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    26,608
    113

    Nope. Operators were universally female in my limited experience. Every one I talked to was female, the only operator I knew in person was female, and she never once talked about a male co-worker. I'm sure somewhere there was a male, but in my mind when I hear "operator" I think of a woman at a switchboard connecting phone calls.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    26,608
    113
    *Every* guy? Really? Every single one?

    I tried to get my wife to shoot everything from 9mm to .40 to .45. She tried several, from among my handguns and my dad's handguns. She didn't like them. The only gun she like shooting was my .22. She has tiny hands, and - more importantly - nerve damage from a since-replaced disk in her neck that prevents her from maintaining a tight grip. A .380 is the only thing she can actually hold and shoot, that is worth carrying.

    So, when we went to buy her a gun, we started with the .380s. She is very happy with her Glock 42, even though I know that I can barely hold the thing, and certainly wouldn't enjoy shooting it. But she does.

    So you didn't go straight to a plastic .380 and tried a wide variety of guns with her. Sounds like you're not who Bird's is talking about and can reign it back in a bit.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    11,103
    113
    Avon
    So you didn't go straight to a plastic .380 and tried a wide variety of guns with her. Sounds like you're not who Bird's is talking about and can reign it back in a bit.

    Well, yes and no.

    When we went to buy her a gun (which was the context of the comment to which I was replying), I went straight to a plastic .380. So strictly speaking, the original comment did apply.

    But at the same time: trying different guns with her before we got one for her was for her benefit, not for mine. I knew what she would want before ever trying, because I know her physical (and mental) limitations. She can't physically handle a full-sized Glock .45. I think that she *could* handle, say, an LCP or my SR9c, but she doesn't yet have the confidence in herself to handle even a gun that size. I knew she'd go for something like the LC380 or Glock 42 (or the Sig .380 variant, which my mom has) - but I wanted *her* to make that determination on her own, so that she'd have confidence in the gun she ended up owning.

    So, yeah - ultimately I'm not the target audience. I just thought the blanket statement was a bit too broad-brush. I agree with what he was saying in principle.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    36,190
    149
    Valparaiso
    Amen! the biggest problem I have is which one to get? I'm editing to clarify...this was meant as a joke. Maybe not a funny at that.

    My point is simply...and I wasn't joking...that acting like an AR isn't made to kill people is revisionist history. That's what the original AR was designed for. No debate. That is what makes it a sound defensive weapon choice. I am not saying that that is all they could be used for or that everyone who gets one wants to kill people.

    Sure, people use ARs for hunting varmints to deer and they can do those jobs well. Sure, people use them for plinking and competition and that's great. That is not what they were designed for and acting like they were because we're afraid of the opposition shows weakness and intellectual dishonesty. "Modern sporting rifle" is a euphemism for: "I'm going to play words games like an anti" at best and "I feel guilty for having an AR" at worst. Reject the games and embrace the truth.

    Many 1903 and 1917 Springfields, M1s, and M14s took deer, but that is not what they were designed for and I've never seen people backing away from these rifle's military history like I see people run scared about an AR.

    Stones people, get some.
     
    Top Bottom