Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG…Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

KROGER

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 104
  1. #21
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    1,738
    Quote Originally Posted by DP425 View Post

    It is also important to note that, the fire protection of RSC isn't really something you should be counting on. Not only is the dry-wall used in most "gun safes", a very, very poor method of hardening against fire... most of it also contains oxidizing chemicals that off-gas on their own to some degree, and at a very high rate when exposed to high temps. Long story short, not only is your RSC not very effective at protecting against fire, no matter what the manufacture claims, it has the potential to rust your firearms despite ideal storage conditions (low humidity), and will almost certainly do so should you experience a fire.
    Yea fire protection is a whole other aspect to the safe that is a problem in itself. Not to mention that even if it had proper fire protection, when the burned floor weakened and my safe dropped 10 feet onto the cement in the basement, that would be a problem in its own!

  2. #22
    MGO Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    MI Wayne County
    Posts
    761
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerV76 View Post
    Again, why should I have to secure MY property in MY home that I have given no access to anyone but myself?

    Stay out of my home and there wouldn't be any stolen property.

    God I hate victim blaming. "That damn girl shoulda never wore that dress and she wouldn't have been raped". Such a stupid argument.



    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    The only victims are the ones getting shot by stolen firearm not secured properly by irrresponsibls gun owners

    By your logic I shouldn’t have to wear my seat belt because my vehicle is my property and i didn’t give you permission to smash into me..

  3. #23
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Clarkston
    Posts
    5,224
    Quote Originally Posted by BPS View Post
    The only victims are the ones getting shot by stolen firearm not secured properly by irrresponsibls gun owners

    By your logic I shouldn’t have to wear my seat belt because my vehicle is my property and i didn’t give you permission to smash into me..
    The only victims are the ones being shot by stolen firearms? Really? The person who was robbed is now not a victim? In what warped reality is this believable? How very liberal of you to decide this.

    And yes, if you wanna risk YOUR life not wearing a seatbelt who is anyone to tell you not to. Same with the helmet law which is now gone. You wanna chance it then by all means do so. Doesn't affect me in the slightest.

    We should outlaw drinking, flying, swimming, eating and anything else that can cause you to die or be injured right?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  4. #24
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Clarkston
    Posts
    5,224
    You guys should probably start protesting the gun stores that have been robbed in the past year. What have there been in this area? 4? If they only had a safe right? Criminals gotta eat, who are we to judge them for how they do so.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  5. #25
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    1,738
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerV76 View Post
    You guys should probably start protesting the gun stores that have been robbed in the past year. What have there been in this area? 4? If they only had a safe right? Criminals gotta eat, who are we to judge them for how they do so.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Sure, let me go make my sign... "Please keep your doors unlocked before you leave, that way you don't have to pay for a new window too. The criminals are going to steal your guns anyways, so don't even try to protect them."

    Also, why do you keep assuming that we feel bad for the criminals? I don't think anyone has condoned what they are doing but that's the assumption you keep making.

  6. #26
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Lansing
    Posts
    5,892
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerV76 View Post
    The only victims are the ones being shot by stolen firearms? Really? The person who was robbed is now not a victim? In what warped reality is this believable? How very liberal of you to decide this.

    And yes, if you wanna risk YOUR life not wearing a seatbelt who is anyone to tell you not to. Same with the helmet law which is now gone. You wanna chance it then by all means do so. Doesn't affect me in the slightest.

    We should outlaw drinking, flying, swimming, eating and anything else that can cause you to die or be injured right?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Not actually true... in the slightest. Actually, you're likely directly impacted more-so by seatbelt and helmet usage than firearms theft. If you own a car or motorcycle, you're taking the financial hit for those people who took the risk, and came up on the bad side of luck... but not so far on the bad side to be dead.

  7. #27
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Clarkston
    Posts
    5,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Iamero View Post
    Sure, let me go make my sign... "Please keep your doors unlocked before you leave, that way you don't have to pay for a new window too. The criminals are going to steal your guns anyways, so don't even try to protect them."

    Also, why do you keep assuming that we feel bad for the criminals? I don't think anyone has condoned what they are doing but that's the assumption you keep making.
    Because you are blaming the victim, oh I'm sorry they aren't victims anymore, for being robbed. Stay the hell out if people's homes and there's no issue. "But but we live in a bad world". We have for decades but why do the victims, oops sorry I keep forgetting they aren't victims now, get blamed for expecting their property to be their property.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  8. #28
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Clarkston
    Posts
    5,224
    Quote Originally Posted by DP425 View Post
    Not actually true... in the slightest. Actually, you're likely directly impacted more-so by seatbelt and helmet usage than firearms theft. If you own a car or motorcycle, you're taking the financial hit for those people who took the risk, and came up on the bad side of luck... but not so far on the bad side to be dead.
    Was speaking on his personal well being. Financially we are screwed whether he wears one or not. My current insurance rate thanks to 2 different instances of idiots totalling my cars while parked show that. One happened to not be wearing a seatbelt because he was reaching on the floor board to get his sandwich. The other lady was wearing one. My rates doubled both times.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  9. #29
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Clarkston
    Posts
    5,224
    This is easily remedied by just banning guns. Why should law abiding citizens have access to something that a criminal can steal and commit a crime with.

    There are some seriously strange conversations on here lately. I gotta wonder if some people are hitting the egg nog a bit too much this season.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  10. #30
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    1,738
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerV76 View Post
    Because you are blaming the victim, oh I'm sorry they aren't victims anymore, for being robbed. Stay the hell out if people's homes and there's no issue. "But but we live in a bad world". We have for decades but why do the victims, oops sorry I keep forgetting they aren't victims now, get blamed for expecting their property to be their property.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Nobody said they aren’t a victim. Again, that was an assumption because we didn’t treat everyone in this example with the same level of sympathy.

    Let’s consider a thief is walking down the sidewalk and looking into parked cars for valuables to steal. There are four cars parked there.

    Car 1: the doors are locked, the windows are up, and the valuables are not laying out in the open.
    Car 2: the doors are locked, the windows are up, but they left their wallet or laptop sitting on the seat.
    Car 3: the doors are unlocked or the windows are down, and there are valuables on the seat or the floor.
    Car 4: the doors are locked, the windows are up, and there are no valuables left in the car.

    Who is most likely to become a victim in this situation? Probably car 2 and 3. While car 1 is still at risk of having valuables stolen, it is less likely than car 2 or 3. Car 4, like car 1, is less likely to become a victim. But if they do become a victim of a broken window, at least they were not a victim of stolen property as well.

    In any case, the criminal is doing something wrong by going into that persons car, there is no denying that and I’m not arguing that point. What my argument is is that just because something might happen does not mean that we should make it easier on the criminal or make ourselves more vulnerable to that happening.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
only search Michigan Gun Owners Forums
MGO's Facebook MGO's Twitter