RE: Another church shooting

RE: Another church shooting (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

FirmhandKY -> RE: Another church shooting (7/30/2008 11:00:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u There is no discussion to be had with any that think more guns on our campus's is the answer.BTW the example you cite is a case of 2 LEO happening to be on the scene...I am willing to concede armed law enforcement officers is a good thing...well meaning civilians pulling their personal weapons is another matter. shrugs So you refuse to discuss it with me? This improves your ability to change my mind, or at least open it to the possibilities that you wish to enact ... how, exactly? As far as the two individuals being off-duty LEO ... that's my point. They were also students, and had to go to their vehicles to get their guns to try to prevent the murder of innocents. Why? As I have said twice now... education, training, and stiff punishments. I'm open to a discussion on the subject. Guns are dangerous in the hands of uneducated and unappreciative people. But I think the solution is more along the lines of improving understanding, and extending rights, and not confiscation and ostrich behavior. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: Another church shooting (7/30/2008 11:25:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hardbodysub Evidently, you believe that anecdotal experiences shouldn't be the basis for the resolution of the problem, ... that is, unless the anecdote supports your view. Then, it's a great idea. Perhaps you haven't had time to read this longish thread where I reference the fact that there are studies which indicate that the increased gun carry reduces the crime rate. No, I didn't link to them, or make that big of a deal, but you can easily google yourself, if you're actually interested. I have no idea what slvmike4u's specific anecdotal experiences(s) are that have lead him to his conclusions. He has had the opportunity to share, and has declined to do so, and I personally find it gauche to inquire, or make his specific emotionally difficult experiences fodder for dissection in a public forum. I chose to attempt to approach him, therefore, in a more personable, and less dry manner that a full exposition of the evidence to date would have been. However, my example doesn't really fall into the generally accepted category of "anecdotal evidence", although I take your point. The link has several definitions, for your further education. What I quoted was from Wikipedia, but is based on media reports, and the trial. It was an example of but one of the "invisible benefits" that guns generally provide (how many rapes, murders, assaults etc have been prevented by the legal possession of guns?). Lately, there have been efforts to document these benefits (Google is your friend). I could as well discussed the fact that all the school shootings that are so widely publicized (as Al has pointed out) were in "gun free" zones, or places in which guns are forbidden to the law abiding public. But I trust that people of at least average intelligence would be able to see that themselves, as it flows logically from my example. Anything else bothering you "hardbody"? Firm

Gwynvyd -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 4:59:03 PM)
Well I spoke on the topic of Forgiveness this morning at church. Earlier in the service we discussed the shooting at one of our churches in Knoxville. ( one that I used to go to) Here is the link if you care to give it a listen. http://www.uustpete.org/Sermons/pc_08_03_08.mp3 Gwyn

Vendaval -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 5:05:04 PM)
FHKY and anyone else wanting to comment on a related thread go here - http://www.collarchat.com/m_2035231/tm.htm "Rather than hijack a thread I decided to look up some information provided by Archer for another debate. Project Exile began in Richmond, Virginia in 1997. The goal was to enforce the Gun Control Act of 1968." (format and color edit)

Vendaval -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 5:08:08 PM)
How did the service go this morning, Gwyn?

Gwynvyd -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 5:58:49 PM)
It went really really well. Severial of our Congregants came up to me.. some with tears in thier eyes hugging me, and telling me how important the sermon was to them. It really touched them. The reading I did that was not in the recording was a good one too. ( wish it had been) I am so happy to help my church family and others who showed up today. Gwyn

apiercedkitty -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 6:58:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And Thadius if nothing is done who explains it to the parents of the children yet to die.I am fully aware that all tragedy's can not be averted,but my skin crawls when the argument is put forth that the answer to incidents like Virginia Tech is more guns on campus.How many national tragedy's before some attempt is made to remedy this situation...I don't have the answers,hell I don't even know all the right questions...all I know is far too many of our fellow citizens fall in front of these weapons.. When people are properly trained to carry, they are a great source of security for people who don't carry. If there had been people on the VT campus that were trained to carry, there would have been a better chance of lessening the number of deaths.

Gwynvyd -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 7:05:39 PM)
Great.. more guns on campus... in the streets.. it will be like the old West. We all know how safe it was back then. I think we are going to see more people get violent and go ape shit as the economy declines further and further. Other countries already have food riots because the cost of food has gone up more then they can pay for staples. Our greed enginered it. ( selling of sub prime loans as A + prime loans over seas has crippled thier banks and economies ) Gwyn

Vendaval -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 9:40:27 PM)
I am glad that your sermon went so well. What is the status on the church members who were shot? I know that a second person died.

slvemike4u -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 9:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: apiercedkitty quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And Thadius if nothing is done who explains it to the parents of the children yet to die.I am fully aware that all tragedy's can not be averted,but my skin crawls when the argument is put forth that the answer to incidents like Virginia Tech is more guns on campus.How many national tragedy's before some attempt is made to remedy this situation...I don't have the answers,hell I don't even know all the right questions...all I know is far too many of our fellow citizens fall in front of these weapons.. When people are properly trained to carry, they are a great source of security for people who don't carry. If there had been people on the VT campus that were trained to carry, there would have been a better chance of lessening the number of deaths. And just what sort of training are you refering to here,weekends shooting at paper targets does not qualify someone to respond to such a situation.Do you have any idea of the chaos that such a situation actually is,how the accoustics of gun shots echoing inside that building are distorted,now imagine 2 or more well meaning civilians walking into that situation with guns drawn....why do pro-gun folks assume only the perpatrator will be shot.More than likely innocents will be hit by these well meaing civilians who are mist likely firing at a live target for the first time in their lives...yet every time you people bring it up your "gun-toting hero"allways hits his mark and we hold a parade for him...life doesn't work like that and neither does death

FirmhandKY -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 10:40:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: apiercedkitty When people are properly trained to carry, they are a great source of security for people who don't carry. If there had been people on the VT campus that were trained to carry, there would have been a better chance of lessening the number of deaths. And just what sort of training are you refering to here,weekends shooting at paper targets does not qualify someone to respond to such a situation.Do you have any idea of the chaos that such a situation actually is,how the accoustics of gun shots echoing inside that building are distorted,now imagine 2 or more well meaning civilians walking into that situation with guns drawn....why do pro-gun folks assume only the perpatrator will be shot.More than likely innocents will be hit by these well meaing civilians who are mist likely firing at a live target for the first time in their lives...yet every time you people bring it up your "gun-toting hero"allways hits his mark and we hold a parade for him...life doesn't work like that and neither does death I suspect that the emotional response of you and others prevent you from thinking clearly (or prevents you from thinking rationally about the issue at all). We can never know "what might have happened" if the VT campus had had a sizable number of trained and educated "concealed carry" citizens. But, suppose ... there were enough to confront and take the shooter down, but a single stray bullet from an armed citizen injures or kills a bystander. In this alternate world, this might have happened after only Cho had killed a couple of people. You would never known that for the price of that one innocent life the concealed carrier saved the life of about 28 more people. Instead you would be screaming for more control, less guns, and for the concealed carrier's ass in a sling. Yeah ...we should take all guns away, if it can prevent the death of a single innocent. Just like we should ban the use of all vehicles because occasionally they are used recklessly and causes tragedy. Just like we should ban bathtubs because of the number of people who slip in them and die. I much prefer not to put my life, and the lives of those I care for in the judgment of those such as you who seem to be incapable of overcoming their emotions (no matter how hard earned) about a subject such as this. The reasons that you always hear gun rights advocates screaming about "You aren't going to take away my guns" is because, for people such as you, there is no level of training, there is no level of capability and safety that you will accept less than the total denial of everyone's right to bear arms. Your earlier attempt to short circuit the argument through denigration of the "slippery sloped" analogy simply means that you are trying, rhetorically, to cut off that line of defense ... because the total and complete banning of guns is your ultimate objective. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 10:57:56 PM)
And once again you seek to divine my thoughts and goals.Please don't try to put words in my mouth ....but to the point of your post ,in your hypotheticel situation you have a number of conceal and carry civilians drawing their weapons...and as usual when pro-gun advocates play this game no confusion ensues...everyone involved automatically knows who the shooter is and who the "good-guys'are never in these situations it would seem do fear and confusion enter the picture...I will ask once again what type of training would qualify civilians to calmly recognise and asess such a choatic and fluid situation quickly and calmly...I will help you with this one ...there is no such training...one can not really train to be under fire...police deartments simulate it,armed forces train under conditions that approximate it..but till these professional are actually in such a situation...even these professionals admit the training is nothing like the real thing.But none of this will serve to make you rethink your position,you are as wedded to yours as I to mine,the difference being my goals are not what you would subscribe to me ,I am not so uneasonable to think guns will ever be banned in this country,nor would I want that...but of course you will not believe that ...because it is your mind that is made up and closed not mine

FirmhandKY -> RE: Another church shooting (8/3/2008 11:41:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And once again you seek to divine my thoughts and goals.Please don't try to put words in my mouth ....but to the point of your post ,in your hypotheticel situation you have a number of conceal and carry civilians drawing their weapons...and as usual when pro-gun advocates play this game no confusion ensues...everyone involved automatically knows who the shooter is and who the "good-guys'are never in these situations it would seem do fear and confusion enter the picture...I will ask once again what type of training would qualify civilians to calmly recognise and asess such a choatic and fluid situation quickly and calmly...I will help you with this one ...there is no such training...one can not really train to be under fire...police deartments simulate it,armed forces train under conditions that approximate it..but till these professional are actually in such a situation...even these professionals admit the training is nothing like the real thing.But none of this will serve to make you rethink your position,you are as wedded to yours as I to mine,the difference being my goals are not what you would subscribe to me ,I am not so uneasonable to think guns will ever be banned in this country,nor would I want that...but of course you will not believe that ...because it is your mind that is made up and closed not mine I've said several times that I believe that education, training and strict enforcement would be warranted. You have said nothing except all who wish to maintain their gun rights are - in effect - heartless and careless. You admit to a visceral, emotional distaste for guns. I've tried several times to engage you in rational discussion. You claim to be too "emotionally distraught" to do so. Perhaps you should just stop posting on the subject if it is so difficult for you. Fir

philosophy -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 10:18:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I've said several times that I believe that education, training and strict enforcement would be warranted. ......okies, honest question. What sort of education are you talking about here? Obviously such a course would cover stuff like knowing where the safety catch is, and how to properly secure a weapon. However, in order to have a beneficial effect in places like schools etc, wouldn't such an education have to also include the kind of stuff presently only taught to specialised law enforcement people and the like. How to spot the danger in a crowd, how to isolate the threat, how to minimise civilian casualties. i have sympathy for your position Firm, it is refreshing to read a pro-gun individual who can see room for improvement in the situation. i'm just curious, because i can see one major effect of what you're proposing being a sort of peoples militia for law enforcement occuring.......

slvemike4u -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 10:38:48 AM)
Firm you keep asserting that my position is thus: "You have said nothing except all who wish to maintain their gun rights are - in effect - heartless and careless"...please show me where I have stated this,you keep referring to my emotionally distraught state of mind....please tell me where i have made such an admission(I have stated that the subject is an emotional one,and that I have history)...You further assert I and others "like me"will only be satisfied with confiscating your guns...please show me where I have said this What I have stated ,and will continue to state is my belief that more guns equal more deaths...this is a belief of mine and I do believe I am entitled to it with out being branded an anti-gun zealot You and others have asserted that more guns would mean less casualties in situations such as VT,I have asked how you come upon such conclusion's,you cite well trained citizens with conceal and carry permits....I would like to know where these citizens are acquiring this advanced level of training...The NYC Police Dept can not seem to properly train all its officers in the correct and proper use of deadly-force..but in your mind some well meaning citizens after a couple of w/e courses are not only going to stay calm and identify the shooter but return fire under duress and hit the perpetrator rather than shoot each other....I am highly skeptical of the training and the experience of these citizen's abilities ,you on the other hand treat it as a certainty....which of us has a firmer grasp on the reality of the situation...you and your belief in a bunch of Audie Murphy's disguised as citizens ...or me and my healthy dose of doubt..

Archer -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 11:17:49 AM)
I'll wade back in here a bit. Armed CCP holder #1 sitting in class at college, hears the gunshots and does what his limited basic training says to do "Find cover and wait". I'm not talking about the CCP holder wandering the hallways trying to hunt down the bad guy. I'm saying the CCP holder sitting in class gunshots ring out everyone goes to the back of the classroom and CCP holder hides behind a desk and waits until there is a "DIRECT" threat. Guy kicks in the door and starts shooting or screaming and brandishing the weapon (average gunfight 3 rounds each two total hitting anyone). Even if you wait to be 100% sure (the guy shoots the first student in your class) your resistance with a firearm is the most effective resistance available. The classes (everyone I've attended or heard about) tell folks flat out YOU ARE NOT A COP so don't try being one. Your legal rights to use this pistol are limited and even if you beat the criminal case that could be filed you might not beat the civil case. So the idea is not that CCP holders act as securty guards or Cops they simply have the means to protect themselves a bit more effectively than unarmed students with zero training. The" it'll be the Wild West all over again" is the opposite extream of the "it'll stop all the criminals" possition. The deterant effect of the potential for a criminal attacking a known unarmed target vs a possibly armed one has been studied. Findings are strong that when the criminal doesn't know for sure they most often move on to easier less dangerous targets.

DomKen -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 11:32:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer I'll wade back in here a bit. Armed CCP holder #1 sitting in class at college, hears the gunshots and does what his limited basic training says to do "Find cover and wait". I'm not talking about the CCP holder wandering the hallways trying to hunt down the bad guy. I'm saying the CCP holder sitting in class gunshots ring out everyone goes to the back of the classroom and CCP holder hides behind a desk and waits until there is a "DIRECT" threat. Guy kicks in the door and starts shooting or screaming and brandishing the weapon (average gunfight 3 rounds each two total hitting anyone). Even if you wait to be 100% sure (the guy shoots the first student in your class) your resistance with a firearm is the most effective resistance available. The classes (everyone I've attended or heard about) tell folks flat out YOU ARE NOT A COP so don't try being one. Your legal rights to use this pistol are limited and even if you beat the criminal case that could be filed you might not beat the civil case. So the idea is not that CCP holders act as securty guards or Cops they simply have the means to protect themselves a bit more effectively than unarmed students with zero training. The" it'll be the Wild West all over again" is the opposite extream of the "it'll stop all the criminals" possition. You're making the assumption that CCP holders will actual retain and put into use their training, if they actually received it in the first place. Let's look at hunters, who in most, all?, of the US take mandatory firearms safety course to get their permits. They're trained not to keep a round chambered when not actually hunting but myriad accidents involving accidental discharge of firearms while in camp or traveling to and from blinds indicates this basic safety procedure is not universally implemnted. They're trained to never point a loaded weapon at anything they don't intend to shoot. All the accidental shootings and near misses resulting from carelessness and horseplay indicates this isn't universally applied either. Another aspect of safety that is repeated frequently is to always positively identify the target before firing. This most basic safety measure when using something able to kill is so widely and routinely ignored that the wearing of blaze orange attire is now mandatory for hunters in much of the country. So I'm not going to take seriously the argument that CCP training will result in people who can be relied upon to behave appropriately in a dangerous situation.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 11:39:43 AM)
quote: You're making the assumption that CCP holders will actual retain and put into use their training, if they actually received it in the first place. Let's look at hunters, who in most, all?, of the US take mandatory firearms safety course to get their permits. They're trained not to keep a round chambered when not actually hunting but myriad accidents involving accidental discharge of firearms while in camp or traveling to and from blinds indicates this basic safety procedure is not universally implemnted. They're trained to never point a loaded weapon at anything they don't intend to shoot. All the accidental shootings and near misses resulting from carelessness and horseplay indicates this isn't universally applied either. Another aspect of safety that is repeated frequently is to always positively identify the target before firing. This most basic safety measure when using something able to kill is so widely and routinely ignored that the wearing of blaze orange attire is now mandatory for hunters in much of the country. So I'm not going to take seriously the argument that CCP training will result in people who can be relied upon to behave appropriately in a dangerous situation. Damn - with that logic, cars should also be banned, because with all the driver training, and PSA's concerning car safety people still fuck up and die in accidents. Wait a second people also die drowning in pools - BAN THEM! With the most tested and trained pilots, jets crash - BAN THEM! A sea captain with 35 years of training got the Titanic sunk, why are there still cruise ships? - BAN THEM! Hell - teaching math in schools can lead to someone developing the math skills necessary to build a bomb - Why are we risking that possibility and educating our kids? Better to put all the guns and weapons in the government's hands - yeah, our government and bureaucrats know what's best for us and should be trusted with our well being and security. They already do such a great job with everything else they've tried.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 12:57:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Damn - with that logic, cars should also be banned, because with all the driver training, and PSA's concerning car safety people still fuck up and die in accidents. Wait a second people also die drowning in pools - BAN THEM! With the most tested and trained pilots, jets crash - BAN THEM! A sea captain with 35 years of training got the Titanic sunk, why are there still cruise ships? - BAN THEM! Hell - teaching math in schools can lead to someone developing the math skills necessary to build a bomb - Why are we risking that possibility and educating our kids? Better to put all the guns and weapons in the government's hands - yeah, our government and bureaucrats know what's best for us and should be trusted with our well being and security. They already do such a great job with everything else they've tried. Which is exactly what I've said a few times already, but it is ignored. Anyone who wishes to have a perfectly safe world is living in a fantasy. And, as I said, I'd rather take personal steps to ensure my safety, rather than relying on the make-believe world of the gun banning folks. Firm

Archer -> RE: Another church shooting (8/4/2008 1:00:38 PM)
DomKen no you're assuming they will go against their training as well as their instinct and the law and go out and hunt the guy down. 3 assumptions in a chain all going against training and instinct. If training fails then what happens 1. Instinct takes over and the guy hides behind a desk like eveyone else and doesn't take any action until fight vs flight takes over and forces his hand. My assumptions are 1. The guy will take cover, as instinct and experience tells me. (ever seen the involentary duck when a gunshot rings out?) 2. a little time will pass and the guy will remember he has his pistol on him today. (because it's not the first thing that comes to the basicly trained mind belive it or not) 3. at best the guy will wait as I said before until there is a direct threat because he has a healthy fear. ( it takes alot of courage or insanity to go hunt down an armed man and not many will think it's even a good idea, let alone something they really want to do) So my assumptions are based on the person reacting in a natural way and over comming the fear with training. The assumption that a CCP will go out and hunt the guy down (thus needing the training at a high level mentioned before) actually is way out there on the fringe. It goes against fight or flight basics, it goes against training it goes again everything in the normal human mind. Unless and until a CCP has actually seen the "bad guy" the likelyhood they will plan and execute a botched up hollywood search and destroy mission is relatively unheard of. Accidental discharge during hunting comes not from John Wayne syndrom but rather complacency due to lack of percieved threat/ danger (Oh I can do this with the gun loaded nothing will happen) not the same catagory of stress induced fight or flight logic and training. The classes build on the actual instincts rather than ignoring them.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625