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.
If the majority people are encouraged to carry, and be trained, the majority of criminals will be encouraged to fear .
Treating people with guns in fear ,is like being afraid of a cop .
Are you afraid of the police ?
May be you have reason to be.
Is this the problem?
I see some one with a gun in their clothes, I assume it's a cop or some one with a CCW, it doesn't bother me, in fact it's quite comforting to know people are prepared to deal with trouble on the spot.
( when you know what to look for on a person, it is likely a gun or a big cell phone. )
If it came to a choice between a cell phone and a gun "for protection" I choose the gun . Response time on a call can take too long and reliability is not all that impressive.
The gun I am trained with, deals with any relevant threat, the instant I employ my skills.
Considering this day and age, adding a camera to the event would be extremely helpful in reviewing the evidence when the dust settles .
It would take a complete shift away from the "guns as a hobby" thing IMO.
A high level of screening for A GUN to be used as protection or whatnot may be the only way it can be done without getting to the point of outright banning private gun ownership. But it's limiting, and Americans don't like limits. Even though everyone crys "do something" they don't really want anything done and will accept that the tradeoff is going to mean some people die. Nobody like to say that but I believe it's the truth.
It would take a complete shift away from the "guns as a hobby" thing IMO.
A high level of screening for A GUN to be used as protection or whatnot may be the only way it can be done without getting to the point of outright banning private gun ownership. But it's limiting, and Americans don't like limits. Even though everyone crys "do something" they don't really want anything done and will accept that the tradeoff is going to mean some people die. Nobody like to say that but I believe it's the truth.
I don't believe that people 'don't want anything done' -- I believe that the general populace would appreciate the actual enforcement of existing law.
It is very discourging, to me at least, to know that there are laws and ordinances that have been legally enacted by various jurisdictions, only to be tossed aside and not used to convict and punish someone who broke the existing laws on the books.
While President Obama decries gun violence and presses for more laws to restrict ownership, his Justice Department has prosecuted 25 percent fewer cases referred by the main law enforcement agency charged with reducing firearms violence across the country, a computer analysis of U.S. prosecution data shows.
You will never find a mass shooting at a gun range, maybe 1 or 2 might die, but do you know why?
Take a person to a place were no guns are and watch the numbers climb.
WHY?
When the gun holder knows another gun is in the play no matter how crazy they are all plans, ends with their death. What if the guy who took 4 bullets had a gun I wonder how it would have turned out. To them (the KILLER) they want to kill as many as possible. When they know guns are armed with others in the target location, they might question their plans.
So you have 2 options be a victim or be a hero. Which are you?
Remember that includes robberies, rape, murder and government tyranny.
Every time there is a shooting in the US (except Chicago), there is aa call for "new" gun laws.
Can anyone tell me what new gun law would have prevented the Oregon shooting, or any other shooting?
gun laws as you know and I know aren't going to stop anything. Respect for guns might. I was raised in a home where guns were a part of our lives. Dad loved to hunt and I don't mean with a bow and arrow. He also loved the target shooting. Thus he owned about 3 or 4 at least. They were never locked up. None of us would have thought about touching them. I had two younger brothers, born late in life: they were total spoiled brats, in trouble at school (I don't mean juvenile delequents) and had pretty much the run of the house. But, when it came to guns, even they would never get near dad's. When they were old enough dad did teach them to shoot and often took them to the riffle range.
It would take a complete shift away from the "guns as a hobby" thing IMO.
A high level of screening for A GUN to be used as protection or whatnot may be the only way it can be done without getting to the point of outright banning private gun ownership.
yadda yadda
That's like saying we need to encourage people to ride bicycles rather than drive. Probably welcomed to those living in uber-progressive cities who are inclined to do so anyway. You know, unabashed who wish to "save the earth even if it means taking out most of the human race" types. Those who don't really bother to think things through.
They hate oil, yet use iPhones.
There already is a high level of screening. Only private sales in some states are not required to.
Sales by gun stores and other Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders, who are required by federal law to perform background checks of all buyers, and to record all sales, regardless of whether the sale takes place at a gun show or not.
Every time there is a shooting in the US (except Chicago), there is aa call for "new" gun laws.
Can anyone tell me what new gun law would have prevented the Oregon shooting, or any other shooting?
A state or federal preemption law that bans "OSHA for criminals" zones (gun free zones) on any public property, including schools, parks and federal buildings. One thing about these "mass shootings"...90%+ have occurred in places where the shooter knew his victims would be defenseless. And in nearly every one, it took a good guy with a gun to stop the criminal.
A state or federal preemption law that bans OSHA for criminals zones (gun free zones) on any public property, including schools, parks and federal buildings. One thing about these "mass shootings"...90%+ have occurred in places where the shooter new his victims would be defenseless. And in nearly every one, it took a good guy with a gun to stop the criminal.
I'm afraid these people will totally ignore the fact that lunatics go out of their way to target gun free zones... like I said above "Those who don't really bother to think things through", so expecting them to acknowledge they are completely clueless?
Never gonna happen. Your breath is better reserved for ...well ...breathing.
Every time there is a shooting in the US (except Chicago), there is aa call for "new" gun laws.
Can anyone tell me what new gun law would have prevented the Oregon shooting, or any other shooting?
None would.
There are over 20,000 gun laws across the country. Apparently, none of them are "common sense" gun laws. Oh, and BTW...maybe those who are charged under current laws shouldn't be able to cop a plea, and maybe judges shouldn't give those convicted of illegal possession slaps on the wrist and, gee, maybe our outraged president who wants to see the law-abiding unarmed shouldn't PARDON those convicted of illegally possessing guns, and using them in the commission of crimes.
Mine are always locked. Now if someone kills me and steals the key, well.
You don't hunt a Deer with a .22 rimfire. You don't hunt rabbits with a .338. You don't shoot a duck with a rifle. You can't take a rifle onto a pistol range. you can't take a pistol onto a rifle range. You don't want to use a .22 pistol for home protection. If you live in a shotgun only zone for Deer you shouldn't shoot slugs through a full choke. If you live in a lead free zone you need a shotgun made for steel while you still use your other shotgun for everything else. If you paper punch 1000 yards you won't be using your hunting rifle. Your 1000 yard rifle will really suck at close range woods shots and you don't carry a 20 lb rifle for hunting. You don't use your Deer rifle if you hunt large dangerous game. You'd be laughed off the skeet range with a camo, rifle barred 18 inch 12 gauge. You use different shot for different game birds and a different choke, barrel length. If you are smart you have a backup of each one in case it becomes inoperable.
Weapons are tools designed for certain tasks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
You are well immersed in the gun culture! I hope you always stay mentally healthy.
As a traditional woodworker, I own at least 30 something chisels. With different sizes and edge profiles, each one has a different use and purpose. I am well immersed in chisel culture.
And if I were mentally ill, I could probably use one to take out quite a few people befor I was stopped. But if I really wanted to do some damage I would just plow my car down Main St. during the Pumpkin Festival. I would probably take out more people than the Umpqua shooter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
Why do folks that live in rural areas where crime is rare insist on using guns for protection.
Liberal folks that live in high crime big cities do not have guns.
Figure that one out.
Hmmm. What is the correlation there? high crime big cities <---> liberal folks with no guns.
I am currently living in the country. Lots of gun racks on trucks and folks wearing real tree camo. You better believe I won't be creeping around anyone's house around here with malicious intentions.
On the other hand, in Westchester county, NY the largely 'gun free' liberal county where I grew up. You can probably walk into most people's houses, grab their phone out of their hands before they can dial 911, and then make a sandwich from their fridge while they cower, wondering if you were going to kill them or not.
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.
Oh, and BTW...maybe those who are charged under current laws shouldn't be able to cop a plea
, and maybe judges shouldn't give those convicted of illegal possession slaps on the wrist
