Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

In lieu of the movie theater shooting, I figured this article and thread is a appropriate place to discuss this topic. That way, we can focus on the victims and crime itself in the other thread.

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gun-control-surfaces-ct-va-senate-debates-following-193025148.html]Gun control surfaces in CT, VA Senate debates following Colorado shooting | The Ticket - Yahoo! News[/url]

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

:doh: This again...

If more people carried guns legally, this idiot would have had a bullet in his head after his first shot...not after he shot 71 people and killed 12.


End of discussion.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=Monkeydad;926144]:doh: This again...

If more people carried guns legally, this idiot would have had a bullet in his head after his first shot...not after he shot 71 people and killed 12.


End of discussion.[/quote]

You sir are preaching to choir. I think the knee jerk reaction of many are to "ban this" or "ban that" when something tragic happens. Truthfully, had the guy really wanted to kill more people, he would have loaded his car full of those explosives he had in his room and drove his car into the showing. Either that or threw them into the theater like he did the gas bomb. You don't need a gun to kill a lot of people, that much was proved by Timothy McVeigh. (even Al Qaeda)

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

Or people may have still panicked and forgotten they even had a gun.

Or even worse yet, more people could have been hurt or killed in the cross fire.

I'm not sure why anyone needs to buy assault weapons such as the AR-15 (which I believe was once federally banned), and I don't know anyone should be allowed to sell/buy ammunition over the Internet.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[YT]Mm9o3vhKoF8[/YT]

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;926150]Or people may have still panicked and forgotten they even had a gun.

Or even worse yet, more people could have been hurt or killed in the cross fire.

I'm not sure why anyone needs to buy assault weapons such as the AR-15 (which I believe was once federally banned), and I don't know anyone should be allowed to sell/buy ammunition over the Internet.[/quote]

The gun control nuts don't target assault weapons, they are typically afraid of ALL guns. They're called Hoplophobes.

Gun control will only empower and enable criminals like this guy to kill more people and make these mass murder jobs easier. People like this guy will still be able to get guns, they're not concerned about the law obviously. If a murderer still wants to kill people, he'll use another weapon or just block exits and start a fire. The best way to combat these criminals is to arm ourselves responsibly and legally.

President Obama threw out the statement "what if my daughters were in there..."

Mr. President, with all due respect, we both know this jerk would have had a bullet between his eyes when he tossed the smoke bomb, before he fired a single shot. Why? Because someone on the right side of the law had a gun. If the President was honestly affected by this and thinking about his daughters and OUR children, he's realize the error of his thinking with his extreme anti-2nd Amendment stance.

Guns do not kill people. Guns save people when criminals who want to kill people get their hands on guns. They'll still get their guns. Knowing they are walking among a helpless, unarmed population who can't defend themselves will only help their goals.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;926150]
Or even worse yet, more people could have been hurt or killed in the cross fire.
[/quote]


Seriously? That's your argument?

Just let him empty his guns on the crowd then. Don't let responsible, trained gun owners try to stop him. :doh:

People who obtain a C&C license typically take their responsibility very seriously. They get trained. They practice. Most of all, they realize they need to use only when necessary and are typically smart about it because they know acting irresponsibly with a weapon will get them in huge trouble. They're not a bunch of trigger-happy rednecks like the anti-gun activists like to paint them as.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;926150]I'm not sure why anyone needs to buy assault weapons such as the AR-15 (which I believe was once federally banned), and I don't know anyone should be allowed to sell/buy ammunition over the Internet.[/quote]



Why do we need weapons like that? To fight off a corrupt government.


[YT]VZV3iyMz470[/YT]

I think many of you forget why the 2nd amendment was originally put in place. It was so that the armed people could keep it's government in check


[quote]"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380) [/quote]


[quote]"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good" (George Washington) [/quote]


...and I could continue the list of quotes from our former countrymen on why we should and need to be armed. If you don't think our country is going to come to a point where it clashes with its people, then you haven't been paying much attention to history or the evolving situation.


Where is FD and Slinging Sammy at to proclaim what a liberal I am?...lol :silly:

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

I've never understood the mindset that says if more people carried concealed weapons then this would have never happened. That's a huge hypothetical. Secondly, the average citizen has no desire to carry a gun on their person. In fact, most probably have a general discomfort of guns.

Yes, these things will happen. People will break the law and find a way to incite fear and violence no matter what laws are on the books. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't take a closer look at current laws and improve them. Why on earth would someone in suburbia need military grade assault weapons? At a minimum we should reinstate the AWB signed under Bill Clinton in the 90s.

I'm not some knee-jerk pro gun control liberal that wants to ban all guns. Statistics prove that most gun owners are responsible and law abiding. But the laws that govern, say, Montana or the Dakotas, for instance, should be different than those that govern our urban communities.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=12thMan;926164]I've never understood the mindset that says if more people carried concealed weapons then this would have never happened. That's a huge hypothetical. Secondly, the average citizen has no desire to carry a gun on their person. In fact, most probably have a general discomfort of guns. [/quote]

I will agree with this part. Because a crowd was armed, you possibly can't prove that the amount of people killed would have been reduced. Quite simply, that's something we don't know. My guess on the odds or percentages in favor of lesser deaths would be much higher though. Realistically, I imagine 20 trained people carrying firearms would have somehow dampened this guy's plans. If some old dude can carry one and act accordingly, not sure why a even much younger crowd wouldn't have been even more effective.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=12thMan;926164]I've never understood the mindset that says if more people carried concealed weapons then this would have never happened. That's a huge hypothetical. Secondly, the average citizen has no desire to carry a gun on their person. In fact, most probably have a general discomfort of guns.

Yes, these things will happen. People will break the law and find a way to incite fear and violence no matter what laws are on the books. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't take a closer look at current laws and improve them. Why on earth would someone in suburbia need military grade assault weapons? At a minimum we should reinstate the AWB signed under Bill Clinton in the 90s.

I'm not some knee-jerk pro gun control liberal that wants to ban all guns. Statistics prove that most gun owners are responsible and law abiding. But the laws that govern, say, Montana or the Dakotas, for instance, should be different than those that govern our urban communities.[/quote]

No one is saying it would never have happened. This deranged man would still try to kill people. However, he would have been stopped before shooting so many helpless people like fish in a barrel. Same with VA Tech and even Fort Hood, where "gun-free zones" multiplied the number of victims.

Why do anti-2nd Amendment people always sprint to the assault-weapon argument? It's the extreme, not the intentions of most gun owners who are being targeted.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

Pretty much said all that I have to say on the topic here: [url]http://www.thewarpath.net/debating-with-the-enemy/18863-ted-nugent-on-gun-control.html[/url]

Mostly, I am in agreement with 12th.

What a concept ... local laws/regulations for local situations.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=12thMan;926164]I've never understood the mindset that says if more people carried concealed weapons then this would have never happened.[/quote]

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't so.

[quote=12thMan;926164]That's a huge hypothetical. Secondly, the average citizen has no desire to carry a gun on their person. In fact, most probably have a general discomfort of guns. [/quote]

Yes, due to ignorance most people DO have a discomfort around guns. It wouldn't be mandatory to carry a gun, but it should be a choice.

[quote=12thMan;926164]Yes, these things will happen. People will break the law and find a way to incite fear and violence no matter what laws are on the books. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't take a closer look at current laws and improve them.[/quote]

We already have enough laws n the books, lets have them enforced.

[quote=12thMan;926164] Why on earth would someone in suburbia need military grade assault weapons? At a minimum we should reinstate the AWB signed under Bill Clinton in the 90s. [/quote]

Because that's their right. Why should people be allowed to own and operate a vehicle capable of exceeding the speed limit by 3X?

[quote=12thMan;926164]I'm not some knee-jerk pro gun control liberal that wants to ban all guns. Statistics prove that most gun owners are responsible and law abiding. But the laws that govern, say, Montana or the Dakotas, for instance, should be different than those that govern our urban communities.[/quote]

People should have the right to buy and use what they choose. Enforce the laws that we already have.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=Monkeydad;926167]No one is saying it would never have happened. This deranged man would still try to kill people. However,[B] he would have been stopped before shooting so many helpless people like fish in a barrel.[/B] Same with VA Tech and even Fort Hood, where "gun-free zones" multiplied the number of victims.[/quote]

and others would have been killed when they went into his apartment. I mean, hindsight is 20-20 and saying filling the air with lead is the solution simply assumes all the variables break your way.

Trained shooter gets jostled by panicked crowd - misfires.
Trained shooter mistaken by panicked crowd member as a co-conspirator and then steps into someone else's line of fire.
etc., etc. There are a billion ways that your scenario breaks bad.

You may be right. It may have lessened the casualities. It may, however, created more given the panic that was occurring.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;926169]Pretty much said all that I have to say on the topic here: [url]http://www.thewarpath.net/debating-with-the-enemy/18863-ted-nugent-on-gun-control.html[/url]

Mostly, I am in agreement with 12th.

What a concept ... local laws/regulations for local situations.[/quote]

Damn you JR for making me search for your post...lol


For those of you that are lazy.

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/debating-with-the-enemy/18863-ted-nugent-on-gun-control-4.html#post328702[/url]

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;926171]You may be right. It may have lessened the casualities. It may, however, created more given the panic that was occurring.[/quote]

More panic? Knowing he's the only one with a gun and can get a shot at everyone isn't scarier than knowing someone is on your side and is trying to stop him?

There's a madman with a gun. There's going to be mass panic regardless of the circumstances. Not really an argument.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=Monkeydad;926161]Seriously? That's your argument?

Just let him empty his guns on the crowd then. Don't let responsible, trained gun owners try to stop him. :doh:

People who obtain a C&C license typically take their responsibility very seriously. They get trained. They practice. Most of all, they realize they need to use only when necessary and are typically smart about it because they know acting irresponsibly with a weapon will get them in huge trouble. They're not a bunch of trigger-happy rednecks like the anti-gun activists like to paint them as.[/quote]

So are we then giving guns only to trained people then? And making sure they're at the movie too? Or are we, as you seemed to imply, on your first post, giving it to anyone who wanted a gun?

I think SolidSnake's anecdote in the other thread (I believe about his friend) who got a gun and now is spooked by anything and ready to just fire and will one day unintentionally seriously hurt someone innocently was on point.

Sorry, but I don't think more guns is the answer. Nor do I think we should cling so blindly to the 2nd amendment as an excuse for it. If we're not willing to evolve from the past...well then, 12thMan would be 4thMan

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;926176]
Sorry, but I don't think more guns is the answer. [/quote]

John Lott does and he's actually taken the time to substantiate his position. If you have some time please read '[URL="http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html/"]More Guns, Less Crime[/URL]' and you may change your position.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

Monkeydad, can we drop the anti 2nd Amendment hyperbole? Not a single person in any thread that I've participated in has advocated against the 2nd Amendment.

You ask why do liberals jump to the assault weapons argument. Well that's because in all of the most recent mass murders, the perpetrator used an assault weapon. That's why.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

I do think this.

1) people should have to enroll in a training course and pass it before owning a gun

2) no felons or people with mental issues should be allowed to own a gun


Just like a car, a person has to be trained and tested before he's given access to drive down the road. I see no qualm with having a person go through the same type of training for something that could potentially kill another(just like a car) if improperly used.

Now, I don't think people should be allowed to own bazookas or surface to air missiles...lol

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=RedskinRat;926170]Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't so.[/quote]

Again with the smarmy BS. Nice. If you contest the alternative, prove it with verifiable data and not hypotheticals. If you are not contesting the alternative and just stating an obvious truism - yeah for your grasp of the obvious.

Just b/c [I]you[/I] or Monkeydad say it [I]is[/I] so doesn't make it true. It's an unprovable hypothetical based on many assumptions going you're way.

[quote=RedskinRat;926170] ... People should have the right to buy and use what they choose. Enforce the laws that we already have.[/quote]

Other than your usual smugness, I agree with most of your post. Enforce the laws on the books with the caveatthat local communities ought to have some ability to regulate for their locality and concerns of their group. Again, as with all things in civil society, it is a balancing of individual v. group rights.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=Monkeydad;926174]More panic? Knowing he's the only one with a gun and can get a shot at everyone isn't scarier than knowing someone is on your side and is trying to stop him?

There's a madman with a gun. There's going to be mass panic regardless of the circumstances. Not really an argument.[/quote]

So neither of my scenarios could possibly happen? More unidentified shooters might not create more panic? In the confusion, no one could possibly mistake a friendly shooter for a second gunman? In the midst of the screaming, smoke and rushing people, multiple friendly shooters might not mistake each other for other gunmen?

I mean, if you want to play the hypothetical game (hypothetically, trained shooters would not have made this worse), we can do it all day. As for no argument, you haven't stated any argument except "It wouldn't have been as bad b/c I said so."

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;926176]So are we then giving guns only to trained people then? And making sure they're at the movie too? Or are we, as you seemed to imply, on your first post, giving it to anyone who wanted a gun?

I think SolidSnake's anecdote in the other thread (I believe about his friend) who got a gun and now is spooked by anything and ready to just fire and will one day unintentionally seriously hurt someone innocently was on point.

Sorry, but I don't think more guns is the answer. Nor do I think we should cling so blindly to the 2nd amendment as an excuse for it. If we're not willing to evolve from the past...well then, 12thMan would be 4thMan[/quote]

You just can't walk into a gun store and buy a hand gun and then get a carry permit. See the attached. All we have to do is look at the states and cities where guns are illegal. If I'm correct they have on average much higher crime rates. More liberal gun laws in areas seem to have lower crime rates. Its one thing to break into a house knowing they don't have guns and another to break into a house not knowing.

[LEFT][COLOR=#000000][B]Instructions[/B]
[LIST=1][*][LIST][*]1 Pass the concealed weapon training class and be over the age of 21. You must pass the training course prior to submitting an [URL="http://www.ehow.com/how_6656076_obtain-gun-licenses-virginia.html#"][COLOR=darkgreen]application[/COLOR][/URL] for your gun license. The costs and training depend on the permit you are trying to acquire.

[*]2 Go to the circuit court and complete an application in person. You will need your training [URL="http://www.ehow.com/how_6656076_obtain-gun-licenses-virginia.html#"][COLOR=darkgreen]certificate[/COLOR][/URL] and photo identification. Most jurisdictions require fingerprints for residents and non-residents. You cannot send your license application in the mail. The court clerk has 45 days to deny or approve your permit application. If your application hasn't been processed within 45 days, the court clerk will issue you a temporary permit that will expire in 90 days.

[*]
[*]3 Renew your permit. Every five years residents and non-residents must renew their permit. Non-residents must provide fingerprints, but residents do not.

[/LIST][/LIST]
Read more: [URL="http://www.ehow.com/how_6656076_obtain-gun-licenses-virginia.html#ixzz21YCCXO2w"]How to Obtain Gun Licenses in Virginia | eHow.com[/URL] [url=http://www.ehow.com/how_6656076_obtain-gun-licenses-virginia.html#ixzz21YCCXO2w]How to Obtain Gun Licenses in Virginia | eHow.com[/url][/COLOR][/LEFT]

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;926179]I do think this.

1) people should have to enroll in a training course and pass it before owning a gun

2) no felons or people with mental issues should be allowed to own a gun


Just like a car, a person has to be trained and tested before he's given access to drive down the road. I see no qualm with having a person go through the same type of training for something that could potentially kill another(just like a car) if improperly used.

Now, I don't think people should be allowed to own bazookas or surface to air missiles...lol[/quote]

Here is sunny CA that's exactly what we have to do.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;926176]So are we then giving guns only to trained people then? And making sure they're at the movie too? Or are we, as you seemed to imply, on your first post, giving it to anyone who wanted a gun?

I think SolidSnake's anecdote in the other thread (I believe about his friend) who got a gun and now is spooked by anything and ready to just fire and will one day unintentionally seriously hurt someone innocently was on point.

Sorry, but I don't think more guns is the answer. Nor do I think we should cling so blindly to the 2nd amendment as an excuse for it. If we're not willing to evolve from the past...well then, 12thMan would be 4thMan[/quote]
Don't forget they would need a gas mask too in order to shoot down the CO gun man. Night vision would probably help too. Not even Rambo would have stopped that guy. He had the element of surprise, tear gas, darkness and no fear for his own life. To say the deck was stacked in his favor is a understatement.

I really don't care if folks (sane law abiding) have guns but to think if you could carry around a gun in your township as though you were Charles Bronson cleaning up the streets of crazed gunman is just quit humorous to me. Unless you have a military or police training most likely you are going to freeze up in that situation or worst shoot a innocent person. The crazed person is not going to stand there like a paper target waiting for you to be the hero.

CO movie shooter, VT, Columbine are sucker punches; no way to defend them. Even Bruce Lee could have been sucker punched if he didn't know it was coming. How can I defend against a sucker punch? Keep my hands up during the whole day protecting my face? Look kind of silly. If some one wants to sucker punch you they are going to do it.

I swear some of you most day dream like Ralphie from a Christmas Story with his Red Ryder taking out the robberies in his backyard.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=RedskinRat;926185]Here is sunny CA that's exactly what we have to do.[/quote]

Even for rifles and shotguns?

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

It's so weird how people hear what they want to hear when they're passionate about an issue. I clearly stated most gun owners are law abiding and responsible. Yet I'm still considered a knee jerk, anti 2nd Amendment liberal.

I will say this, I'm concerned about who foots the bill for mental health screenings. This is where I'm probably more right leaning or libertarian in my thinking.

*Are the screenings now part of the cost of doing business for gun store owners?
*Do these same rules apply to sporting goods store owners that happens to sells guns?
*Who deems you mentally competent? The government? Well that's another can of worms.
*If a gun purchaser aces the mental screening, goes out and blows up the town, who's legally culpable? The gov't or the gun store owner? See where this is going?

I just have concerns about mental healthcare screenings as a way to weed out the loons. The last few systematically planned their shootings with a high degree of planning and had some college. I'm skeptical, though not completely opposed to the idea.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=RedskinRat;926177]John Lott does and he's actually taken the time to substantiate his position. If you have some time please read '[URL="http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html/"]More Guns, Less Crime[/URL]' and you may change your position.[/quote]

In general, I agree with the Lott's conclusions. My biggest dispute, at this point, is the assertion that, in the Aurora shooting, casualties would have been undeniably lessened if they there had been trained gunmen in the audience.

Lott asserts gun ownership promotes deterence. Deterence, however, does not work for crazy folks.

Everyone should just go back and read the Ted Nugent thread. Lots of good stuff in there.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=12thMan;926188]It's so weird how people hear what they want to hear when they're passionate about an issue. I clearly stated most gun owners are law abiding and responsible. Yet I'm still considered a knee jerk, anti 2nd Amendment liberal.

I will say this, I'm concerned about who foots the bill for mental health screenings. This is where I'm probably more right leaning or libertarian in my thinking.

*Are the screenings now part of the cost of doing business for gun store owners?
*Do these same rules apply to sporting goods store owners that happens to sells guns?
*Who deems you mentally competent? The government? Well that's another can of worms.
*If a gun purchaser aces the mental screening, goes out and blows up the town, who's legally culpable? The gov't or the gun store owner? See where this is going?

I just have concerns about mental healthcare screenings as a way to weed out the loons. The last few systematically planned their shootings with a high degree of planning and had some college. I'm skeptical, though not completely opposed to the idea.[/quote]

No one does a mental check. With that said the VT shooter should have been on the list of people who cannot buy a gun. Some how his name was never given to the state and so he was able to purchase his guns.Either way I can think of plenty of ways to kill people without a gun if that's what I wanted to do.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=mredskins;926186]Don't forget they would need a gas mask too in order to shoot down the CO gun man. Night vision would probably help too. Not even Rambo would have stopped that guy. He had the element of surprise, tear gas, darkness and no fear for his own life. To say the deck was stacked in his favor is a understatement.

I really don't care if folks (sane law abiding) have guns but to think if you could carry around a gun in your township as though you were Charles Bronson cleaning up the streets of crazed gunman is just quit humorous to me. Unless you have a military or police training most likely you are going to freeze up in that situation or worst shoot a innocent person. The crazed person is not going to stand there like a paper target waiting for you to be the hero.

CO movie shooter, VT, Columbine are sucker punches; no way to defend them. Even Bruce Lee could have been sucker punched if he didn't know it was coming. How can I defend against a sucker punch? Keep my hands up during the whole day protecting my face? Look kind of silly. If some one wants to sucker punch you they are going to do it.

I swear some of you most day dream like Ralphie from a Christmas Story with his Red Ryder taking out the robberies in his backyard.[/quote]


I have two friends who have a carry permits and I'd bet that both could take the guy down and pretty quick. AAs for the sucker punch. No cannot stop a sucker punch but you can kick the dudes ass after he sucker punches you.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;926187]Even for rifles and shotguns?[/quote]

Don't know, never been interested in owning one.

[url=http://oag.ca.gov/firearms]Bureau of Firearms | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General[/url]

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=mredskins;926186]Don't forget they would need a gas mask ....<SNIP>[/quote]

So you're anti-gun and can't understand how pro-gunners are generally less hysterical and less prone to freezing?

Ok, I see where you're coming from.

:Smoker:

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=firstdown;926193]I have two friends who have a carry permits and I'd bet that both could take the guy down and pretty quick. AAs for the sucker punch. No cannot stop a sucker punch but you can kick the dudes ass after he sucker punches you.[/quote]

You really think with tear gas flying, darkness, body armor, loud noise which resembles gun fire (the movie) and people flying everywhere your buddies would have knocked him off? :doh: Ok, maybe there is something on their Bat utility belt that I am forgetting that would better their odds.

I agree you can beat the crap out of him after the punch but you still have a broken nose.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=mredskins;926197]You really think with tear gas flying, darkness, body armor, loud noise which resembles gun fire (the movie) and people flying everywhere your buddies would have knocked him off? :doh: Ok, maybe there is something on their Bat utility belt that I am forgetting that would better their odds.

I agree you can beat the crap out of him after the punch but you still have a broken nose.[/quote]

So do you shoot guns?

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=RedskinRat;926196]So you're anti-gun and can't understand how pro-gunners are generally less hysterical and less prone to freezing?

Ok, I see where you're coming from.

:Smoker:[/quote]

I am not anti-gun. I personally don't want one but I would never say you can't have one.

I am just saying there is probably a handful of people in this country that would have stopped that guy under those conditions.

I also don't understand how a pro-gunner is generally less hysterical and less prone to freezing. Are you quoting a source or is this your opinion? I am confused.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=firstdown;926198]So do you shoot guns?[/quote]

Yes but not really my thing. Some hunting some target practice. A lot of friends that do it so I just tag along.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

You don't think you would have been better off with one of those friends with a gun defending people or would you rather they just lay on top of you hoping the shooter passes by. I'll take the friend with the gun.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=mredskins;926199]I am not anti-gun. I personally don't want one but I would never say you can't have one. [/quote]

Fair enough

[quote=mredskins;926199]I am just saying there is probably a handful of people in this country that would have stopped that guy under those conditions. [/quote]

That's odd. I personally know a few hundred people, some close friends or family, that even under those conditions can put a round where it's needed. Helps being ex-Army, I guess.

[quote=mredskins;926199]I also don't understand how a pro-gunner is generally less hysterical and less prone to freezing. Are you quoting a source or is this your opinion? I am confused.[/quote]

Most people who take on the responsibility of firearms ownership have a more stable personality, however this is purely anecdotal from my own personal experience. We train, we drill, it becomes automatic. Same with martial arts.

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=RedskinRat;926204]Fair enough



That's odd. I personally know a few hundred people, some close friends or family, that even under those conditions can put a round where it's needed. Helps being ex-Army, I guess.



Most people who take on the responsibility of firearms ownership have a more stable personality, however this is purely anecdotal from my own personal experience. We train, we drill, it becomes automatic. Same with martial arts.[/quote]

Regardless if you are a excellent marksman how do you shoot someone with tear gas going off and in the dark? Should they carry their gun, gas mask, and night vision at all times?

"Heading out to see Batman honey."
[IMG]https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ2XVcVwZmO157NAWquFvTk0PnxuYaUttC5R36ktNIZ5WpZy3BRdw[/IMG]


"OK be safe."

"Always."

Re: Gun Control Thread- Should we?
 

[quote=firstdown;926203]You don't think you would have been better off with one of those friends with a gun defending people or would you rather they just lay on top of you hoping the shooter passes by. I'll take the friend with the gun.[/quote]

Doesn't matter remember it is a sucker punch no way to defend.