Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even the idea of someone shooting back is limited and has proven ineffective. Columbine had an armed deputy at the school who engaged one of the shooters during the massacre. He was unable to stop him and prevent him from entering the school. The only effective means of stopping it is for people in the immediate vicinity to retreat and the police to engage the shooter.
shooting back hasnt been proven ineffective. its been proven to not be 100% effective. you cant really say that shooting back is ineffective but retreating (or hiding) and waiting is effective. most people killed in mass shootings are doing the latter.
As a side note, out of curiosity, what type of competitions did you compete in using a Remington 870? Not that an 870 isn't a fine weapon but I've only seen them used in the military/police/ home defense context. Never at a skeet or trap match. Well actually I've seen them used by beginners on the cheap, never by someone so good they are banned from the sport.
The 870 was also used by James Edgar Holmes during the 2012 Aurora shootings. Certainly we must ban these shotguns too.
When l lived in New Jersey just about every Sunday for 35 years I attended a "turkey shoot" at multiple locations throughout south Jersey....no actual animals are hurt.....paper targets only. I used several Remington 870s with 30" RemChoke barrels that were back bored, fitted with match chambers and a selection of screw in chokes either custom made or factory chokes custom altered all to deliver the tightest pattern possible. All the modifications help to be sure but are worthless if you can't hit a 3" bullseye at ninety feet in the off hand position.....no support of any kind. The winner of each round received a meat prize from a frozen turkey to hams, pork loins, beef roasts, steaks, prime ribs, shrimp etc. Eventually over the years because I won the majority of shoots of the day no one wanted to shoot against me and I was banned from many of the turkey shoots throughout south Jersey. There were rules to be sure and all guns were checked for compliance as were mine its just that I was a more consistent shooter than most.
Regarding banning shotguns......shotguns are recognized as hunting weapons and their primary purpose is hunting animals.....not people.
When l lived in New Jersey just about every Sunday for 35 years I attended a "turkey shoot" at multiple locations throughout south Jersey....no actual animals are hurt.....paper targets only. I used several Remington 870s with 30" RemChoke barrels that were back bored, fitted with match chambers and a selection of screw in chokes either custom made or factory chokes custom altered all to deliver the tightest pattern possible. All the modifications help to be sure but are worthless if you can't hit a 3" bullseye at ninety feet in the off hand position.....no support of any kind. The winner of each round received a meat prize from a frozen turkey to hams, pork loins, beef roasts, steaks, prime ribs, shrimp etc. Eventually over the years because I won the majority of shoots of the day no one wanted to shoot against me and I was banned from many of the turkey shoots throughout south Jersey. There were rules to be sure and all guns were checked for compliance as were mine its just that I was a more consistent shooter than most.
Regarding banning shotguns......shotguns are recognized as hunting weapons and their primary purpose is hunting animals.....not people.
shooting back hasnt been proven ineffective. its been proven to not be 100% effective. you cant really say that shooting back is ineffective but retreating (or hiding) and waiting is effective. most people killed in mass shootings are doing the latter.
20/20 did an experiment. They told a college classroom that a "shooter" was going to burst in, they just weren't told when. They even had a few people who were well-trained with firearms among the class and they were given fake plastic guns to react.
When the shooter suddenly burst in the entire class was sitting ducks. Even those with guns couldn't even get their "guns"out of their pockets or backpacks. They were "blasted" just as easily.
The idea of a Rambo saving the day is largely folly in these situations.
20/20 did an experiment. They told a college classroom that a "shooter" was going to burst in, they just weren't told when. They even had a few people who were well-trained with firearms among the class and they were given fake plastic guns to react.
When the shooter suddenly burst in the entire class was sitting ducks. Even those with guns couldn't even get their "guns"out of their pockets or backpacks. They were "blasted" just as easily.
The idea of a Rambo saving the day is largely folly in these situations.
did the shooter in the "experiment" shoot someone in the hallway before going into that class? did he shoot people in one class and then enter another class where people had guns? guns are used every day for self defense; it doesn't require someone to be Rambo. sometimes it will work out and sometimes it wont. but you have a much better chance with the gun than without it.
I just looked at the video a bit. its pretty ridiculous. it was intentionally set up to fail. its funny how people that want to believe that proves something will believe it. I guess there is a large group of people that don't care enough and will just accept it. im sure there are some that understand how silly it was; but hope other people will buy into it. which one are you?
did the shooter in the "experiment" shoot someone in the hallway before going into that class? did he shoot people in one class and then enter another class where people had guns? guns are used every day for self defense; it doesn't require someone to be Rambo. sometimes it will work out and sometimes it wont. but you have a much better chance with the gun than without it.
I just looked at the video a bit. its pretty ridiculous. it was intentionally set up to fail. its funny how people that want to believe that proves something will believe it. I guess there is a large group of people that don't care enough and will just accept it. im sure there are some that understand how silly it was; but hope other people will buy into it. which one are you?
Whatever side you're on, I'm against. It's a can't fail recipe for enlightened living.
The reality is that the best laid "plans" fail....even the best laid military plans fail....the best plan is to eliminate the weapon of choice of mass shooters and then we won't need to hope our best laid plans work when the bullets start flying.
The reality is that the best laid "plans" fail....even the best laid military plans fail....the best plan is to eliminate the weapon of choice of mass shooters and then we won't need to hope our best laid plans work when the bullets start flying.
you eliminate their weapon of choice and they will then choose the next best thing to kill as many people as they can.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
