RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives?

RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 8:48:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mtcouple I know plenty of civilians that carry concealed, and have gone to the trouble to train for high stress situations. From what I've seen, the people that go to the trouble of getting a concealed carry license, invest in the gear necessary to take advantage of that license, and actually carry a heavy lump of a gun around with them on a day to day basis tend to take firearms training very seriously. Well I'll sleep better....knowing all that you have seen,and taking your word for it and all.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 8:50:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: KYsissy My guess is that the kind of people to have a concealed carry permit are not the type to go to opening night midnight movies. At least not the the ones I personally know Actually, that theatre has a no weapons policy and the city has upheld their right to do so. So, there wouldn't have been anyone armed in that theatre. Rumor has it, it's one of the reasons he chose that particular theatre. Whose rumor ? The NRA's ? Unfortunately, the NRA is making a push to trample upon the rights of property owners by sponsoring bills to allow those with CC permits to bring weapons onto private property where it is otherwise prohibited. They tried it in TN and our Republican state House, Senate and Governor all 3 told them to go pound sand. They aren't happy. Tough Shit.

BamaD -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 8:53:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Dudes. Again. High stress situations. <--issue I've personally been in a high stress situation. I was armed, they were armed. I had just spent 6 hours having a house slowly jackhammered to gravel around me by Hurricane Andrew and here come a group of looters when the damn wind hasnt even let up yet. I had no shakes, all I had was a lovely crisp sight picture as time slowed and things got strangely calm. My breathing slowed, my hearbeat slowed. It was no different from putting the crosshairs on a deer. There was no shooting because I think they realized they wouldn't leave on their feet. 2 days later, one of my close neighbors scored a headshot on an assailant (probably of the same group) that actively was shooting at him from 15 meters. That's right, killed him. The police came by on their daily rounds, tossed the body in the trunk and shook the guy's hand. My neighbor was still digging shotgun pellets out 2 days later. It isn't whether you are a civilian or cop. Cops are no more or less likely to go all to hell in their first firefight. It goes deeper. Cops aren't supermen. They're just men and women like the rest of us. Cops aren't trained for firefights. I'm not sure you CAN train someone for a firefight. Lord knows, the military tries. Don't give me this crap about "highly trained professionals" A: Ive been there B: I've helped train some of them. You either have it or you don't. I agree withyou 100% . For some people things seem to move slower in a crises for others things speed up till afterward they can't tell you what happened. Thats not training, though training can inhance it. Sorry you got in that situation but glad you were able to defend yourself.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 8:54:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You either have it or you don't. I agree withyou 100% . For some people things seem to move slower in a crises for others things speed up till afterward they can't tell you what happened. Thats not training, though training can inhance it. Sorry you got in that situation but glad you were able to defend yourself. Im happier that noone was hurt. It would be hard to live with afterwards even if I was protecting someone important to me.

BamaD -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 9:07:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You either have it or you don't. I agree withyou 100% . For some people things seem to move slower in a crises for others things speed up till afterward they can't tell you what happened. Thats not training, though training can inhance it. Sorry you got in that situation but glad you were able to defend yourself. Im happier that noone was hurt. It would be hard to live with afterwards even if I was protecting someone important to me. True scaring them off is better than having to shoot them.

Musicmystery -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 9:21:05 PM)
quote: Keep moving those goal posts, MM. You started with "Guns should only be carried by "Highly trained professional police officers" I pointed out that they are professional (at least the vast majority) but highly trained, they are most certainly not. I'll type this slowly. Fuck off. The goal posts are right where they've always been. You think armed citizens have magic superpowers. I think trained professionals is a better way to go. If you think police need more training, I'm down with that.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 9:22:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery ] Fuck off. The goal posts are right where they've always been. You think armed citizens have magic superpowers. I think trained professionals is a better way to go. If you think police need more training, I'm down with that. I never said that. You've been studying your debate theory in Idaho. You said "Highly Trained Professionals" sorry but they aren't. It's a damn shame but true.

Musicmystery -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 9:31:35 PM)
A nation of idiots running around with guns, cops and citizens alike. Got it. Damn, feel safer already. [8\|]

mtcouple -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/24/2012 9:44:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: mtcouple I know plenty of civilians that carry concealed, and have gone to the trouble to train for high stress situations. From what I've seen, the people that go to the trouble of getting a concealed carry license, invest in the gear necessary to take advantage of that license, and actually carry a heavy lump of a gun around with them on a day to day basis tend to take firearms training very seriously. Well I'll sleep better....knowing all that you have seen,and taking your word for it and all. I'm just saying what I've seen. Your position seems to be supported by a lot of theoretical what if's based on your last couple posts.

slaveinTulsa -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 12:24:32 AM)
It is time for a moment of bipartisanship. Conservatives say that Liberals want to sieze all the guns from the citizenry and get rid of them. Liberals say that Conservatives want to round up all the (illegal) immigrants and get rid of them. I propose that we make everyone happy by marching all the guns out of this nation on the hips of all the illegal aliens. Two issues solved, and America thanks me!

DomKen -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 2:58:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mtcouple quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mtcouple quote: ORIGINAL: SilverMark As the kid was leaving, and AFTER he had already shot 9 kids, killing two.....just a tad bit late....and all the assistant principal did was detain him....didn't stop anything, the damage was done, the kid was leaving the school....I guess it is possible he might have stopped the kid from shooting anyone on his drive home, assuming he would have done so? As I recall, the gun was in the assistant principal's car, which means that when the shooting started, he had to go out to his car, get his gun, load it, come back into the school, find the shooter, and then stop him. By that time the kid had already killed 9 kids. If he was carrying the gun, the outcome might have been different. oh yea, then there is this: http://www.aikenstandard.com/story/m1040-BC-SC-Shotgun-SCChurch-2ndLd-Writethru-03-26-0803--3890315 The guy had already been at the church causing enough of a problem that the pastor's son was keeping an eye on the parking lot. Concealed carry had nothing to do with this. If he had not been legally allowed to carry a gun when he felt like it, he probably would not have had his pistol in his car, and he most certainly would not have been able to carry it concealed when he sensed trouble. Please explain how this has nothing do to with concealed carry? Anyone can keep a firearm they own legally in their vehicle. You don't need a concaled carry permit for that.

KYsissy -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 3:25:54 AM)
I am glad. The NRA defends the second. Amendment. And I'm glad the ACLU defends the rest

Moonhead -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 4:10:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Norway, not Sweden. And that was the first incident they've had there for a long time, so the gun control works more often than it doesn't. That is in no way reflective of any proof of gun control working except your saying so. The way you put it, if gun control actually worked that incident would not have happened. That was a strawman you made - gun control works so well Norway has had only one. How's that a strawman? You can name another incident in Norway, can you? One incident is a lot better than the incident every couple of years you people have instead, which suggests that tooling up the population is less effective in stopping this sort of thing than gun control is.

tweakabelle -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 4:24:29 AM)
I can't speak to the ins and outs of an incident in Norway. But I can relate what happened here. Following a massacre of 35 people by a lone gunman in 1996, a ban on automatic rifles was legislated. The Govt instituted a buy-back where rifle owners surrendered their weapons and received their cash value in exchange. About 650,000 weapons were bought back and destroyed. There wasn't a single incidence of armed resistance - every one of those gun owners surrendered their weapons peacefully. . Since that incident, we have been spared another incident - so, on the evidence to date (which is all the evidence we ever have isn't it?), it has to be said that the ban has been a success. The ban continues to enjoy widespread public acceptance and support http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)#Community_and_Government_Reaction There is no guarantee that this experience will be replicated overseas. Nor is there any guarantee that another incident will never occur here. However there have been a number of claims that gun owners will not surrender their weapons without a fight. The Australian experience suggests that this claim is a trifle overblown.

mtcouple -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 5:33:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mtcouple quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mtcouple quote: ORIGINAL: SilverMark As the kid was leaving, and AFTER he had already shot 9 kids, killing two.....just a tad bit late....and all the assistant principal did was detain him....didn't stop anything, the damage was done, the kid was leaving the school....I guess it is possible he might have stopped the kid from shooting anyone on his drive home, assuming he would have done so? As I recall, the gun was in the assistant principal's car, which means that when the shooting started, he had to go out to his car, get his gun, load it, come back into the school, find the shooter, and then stop him. By that time the kid had already killed 9 kids. If he was carrying the gun, the outcome might have been different. oh yea, then there is this: http://www.aikenstandard.com/story/m1040-BC-SC-Shotgun-SCChurch-2ndLd-Writethru-03-26-0803--3890315 The guy had already been at the church causing enough of a problem that the pastor's son was keeping an eye on the parking lot. Concealed carry had nothing to do with this. If he had not been legally allowed to carry a gun when he felt like it, he probably would not have had his pistol in his car, and he most certainly would not have been able to carry it concealed when he sensed trouble. Please explain how this has nothing do to with concealed carry? Anyone can keep a firearm they own legally in their vehicle. You don't need a concaled carry permit for that. Actually, in many states, a concealed carry license is required if you want to keep that pistol in your car loaded. And if the pastor's son couldn't legally carry a weapon on his person in church, then the car is likely where the gun would have remained when the guy came through the door with a shotgun. Fat lot of good the gun would have done sitting in the car. And that's beside the fact that the chances of him having a pistol in the car at church are a lot less if it wasn't part of his daily routine to carry a gun everywhere but church.

Real0ne -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 5:53:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: KYsissy My guess is that the kind of people to have a concealed carry permit are not the type to go to opening night midnight movies. At least not the the ones I personally know Actually, that theatre has a no weapons policy and the city has upheld their right to do so. So, there wouldn't have been anyone armed in that theatre. Rumor has it, it's one of the reasons he chose that particular theatre. Whose rumor ? The NRA's ? Unfortunately, the NRA is making a push to trample upon the rights of property owners by sponsoring bills to allow those with CC permits to bring weapons onto private property where it is otherwise prohibited. They tried it in TN and our Republican state House, Senate and Governor all 3 told them to go pound sand. They aren't happy. Tough Shit. Do you have any clue why? The gubafia gets around the constitution bu damned if the people try to manuever around what the gub impassed in an attempt to get their rights back.

Real0ne -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 5:56:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Anyone can keep a firearm they own legally in their vehicle. You don't need a concaled carry permit for that. So if I borrow your firearm I need some kind of permit to transport it? lol

Real0ne -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 5:58:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveinTulsa It is time for a moment of bipartisanship. Conservatives say that Liberals want to sieze all the guns from the citizenry and get rid of them. Liberals say that Conservatives want to round up all the (illegal) immigrants and get rid of them. I propose that we make everyone happy by marching all the guns out of this nation on the hips of all the illegal aliens. Two issues solved, and America thanks me! yeh but dont forget to amputate everyone to insure they cant possibly harm another.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 6:04:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Anyone can keep a firearm they own legally in their vehicle. You don't need a concaled carry permit for that. That depends on where the vehicle is located, Ken. If the vehicle is on private property (say a parking lot of a business) the owner or tenant of the property can prohibit firearms if he or she wishes. This is what the NRA is trying to kill. I feeL that property rights supercede right to carry so they can go pound sand. One of the most basic property rights is "Right of Exclusion".

Real0ne -> RE: Gun Control Saving or Costing Lives? (7/25/2012 6:15:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Anyone can keep a firearm they own legally in their vehicle. You don't need a concaled carry permit for that. That depends on where the vehicle is located, Ken. If the vehicle is on private property (say a parking lot of a business) the owner or tenant of the property can prohibit firearms if he or she wishes. This is what the NRA is trying to kill. I feeL that property rights supercede right to carry so they can go pound sand. One of the most basic property rights is "Right of Exclusion". the vehicle is property. hence it too comes with property rights. How about eminent domain. Right of exclusion only means you can use the law to keep someone from saetting up house in your living room. If you think you have the right of exclusion try not mowing your fucking lawn and see how long it takes for the city to have their foot up your ass.

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875