if you could not bear arms;what would you bear? why??

Answer 1

It's not about bearing arms. It's about preserving rights. No one wants to just fight, we just want to make sure our liberties remain intact. Arms just happen to be the most effective way of doing that.

Answer 2

I live in a country where we cannot have firearms. The crime rate is high, and police response is slow to non-existent. Our home defense consists of dogs, wooden batons and machetes.
Note that criminals can and do carry firearms, though, so we are at a terrible disadvantage compared to Americans.
A friend of mine in Africa defend his home with a bow. On one occasion 6 years ago, he was attacked by a group of marauders armed with AK-47's. (These were formers soldiers from a neighboring country which who had just lost a civil war). One of the marauders was wounded in the leg by an arrow,and the rest fled.

Answer 3

The Shame and Regret That the American People are No Longer Free Nor Able to Protect Thier Homes and Thier Country in Time of Need !

Answer 4

A .243 fire"leg". A Browing Sweet 16 Fire"Neck" And a S&W 500 Fire"Fingers"

Basically no is taking away my guns w/o a fight.

Answer 5

Let's just leave it at I'd bear whatever it takes to get back my rights ..

Answer 6

I'd bear legs

Answer 7

Interpreting this question as "If there was no civilian ownership of firearms, what would you lawfully posess to defend yourself and why?" here is my response:

Many countries have very strict gun control laws that range from our background checks and handgun permits, to the other range of where owning even a shotgun is something only government or military personnel are allowed to do. In the far east, gun control laws are very strict in this manner, to where somebody wishing to simply hunt birds with a shotgun would have to go through more trouble than somebody in the US wishing to purchase and carry a concealed handgun. Typically, this just takes the whole level of weapon supremecy down a notch, such that instead of the cops all carrying around semi-automatic tactical handguns, they carry telescoping batons so that they still have a farther striking distance than the criminals, who are very unlikely to be carrying projectile weapons. Obviously they do not carry around swords anymore, because the intent is no longer to simply vanquish the enemy, but rather to cause pain that forces the subject to submit and be brought under control.

Myself, i feel that having a set of paintball-sized "Pepperballs" would be ideal for defense of the home, due to their non lethal nature, and effectiveness when fired from a compact full-automatic paintball gun. With the impact being painfull enough, the pepper powder that is released causes disorientation as it attacks the respiratory system and wipes out the vision, often leading to vomiting and incapacitation from the training videos i have seen. Unfortunately to my knowledge these are not available to civilians yet, as they are relatively new and currently only on trial with a few police departments.

So with that not being currently available, that limits me either to the stunning impact of normal paintballs (which can NOT be frozen, not even the cheapest brands, without the aid of liquid nitrogen or some other way to bring them to such low temperatures that their frostbite effect would be more damaging than their impact), or to simply resort to more crude "hit em with a stick" type defenses.

While the retractable baton is relatively simple and effective, it does have its limitations in close quarters combat (such as inside the home) and so more advanced versions are necessary. A 12" long tube, with a series of smaller tubes inside, bound to the base with high strength bungee cord, allows a weapon that depending on how it was swung, could either strike as a small heavy rod, or be swung in a large arc to suddenly strike out to 4 feet long and disable an attack from many arms lengths away, yet quickly retract back in at the end of the swing to allow for easy repositioning for a second swing or block. For counterbalance, the bottom end of the tube could hold a set of electrical capacitors, wired out to electrodes covering the sections of tube, to deliver taser-quality shocks, from much farther than the typical handheld application most offer. Equipped with such a device, a person could quickly and confidently confront an attacker armed with an inferior weapon, such as a knife or baseball bat, with a few trained swings not only disarm them, but render them bruised, broken, and unconscious with not too much permanent damage, thanks to the knockout power of carefully controlled high voltages. I could, and probably would, build one myself if not for the fact that i DO own several guns, from handguns to large-magazine assault rifles, allowing me confidence that i am in control of any conflicts on my property out here in the country. Of course, read up and be very mindful of what laws apply to allowing your defense of home and property and family, so that you can be confident in your actions and responsible in how far you take them.

Answer 8

taking Schlauncha's position,I would use Blowguns,Spears,Heavy-duty wrist launcher/slingshot( They CAN kill)And If I really needed to, a homemade gun.

Answer 9

Knives, swords, spears, Bow & Arrows***

Answer 10

hm...
water?
rotten fruit?
i don't think either would be as effective as bearing arms, though