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.
Speak for yourself! I'm not ashamed as I didn't do it and never would do such a thing!!!!!
When these mass shootings happen, America shows it is unique, in that is will not address the situation. "Thoughts and prayers" do as much good as trying to give orders to a cat.
The rest of the world takes a look at the morning news, and in the minds of millions, maybe billions of people around the world, the question is asked, "What kind of a country won't even try to protect its citizens, knowing there are examples to follow around the globe which have already been proven to work? Why would anyone want to live there?"
If you are not part of the solution, as the old saw goes, you are part of the problem. Call your legislators this week and demand action.
If folks are all safer if everyone is armed, why are firearms prohibited at NRA-ILA Leadership Forum?
"* PLEASE NOTE: Due to the attendance of the President of the United States at the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum on Friday, April 26, the U.S. Secret Service will be responsible for event security around the Arena at the Lucas Oil Stadium. As a result, firearms and firearm accessories, knives or weapons of any kind will be prohibited in the forum prior to and during his attendance. "
There are many pro concealed and open carry people in this thread and the El-Paso thread that have been correcting them and injecting a bit of reality. I say this often... CD isn't a reflection of reality. Way too many people living in a movie fantasy and need to step away from CD.. they need to get out and live more.... most probably have zero experience.
Just yesterday, a poster in the other thread claimed that a silenced firearm was "silent". lol. Obviously a person that obtains knowledge from the movies.
I say this again... most owners buy for personal safety and not to play hero. In a active shooter situation, people don't know me, cops don't me, no idea who is shooter, no idea how many shooters, and no way I'm going to live with the fact that I shot an innocent person by mistake. There are just too many factors and unknowns. There's only one reason I would brandish my weapon, if directly threatened.... my focus would be to get myself and family out of harms way. That is not being a coward.. that is being smart.
Youre right, alot of gun owner posters here dont post from a realistic point of view.
First they were saying good guys with guns were the great equalizer for criminals.
Then they said that free gun zones were like shooting fish in a barrel.
Now they say that they wont get involved with an active shooter situation.
They also now say the good guys with guns are the police.
So basically people only need guns at home where the biggest worry is, becuse they wont use it in public for all the reasons you stated.
Theres nothing wrong with being smart, but theres is no point of saying everyone needs to carry to deter criminals, when people will likely run away from the situation regardless.
Which is why the media needs to stop naming the shooter. Stop giving notoriety to the criminals and maybe the narcissists will go find something more socially acceptable to become famous for? Their names should be erased from history, as if they never existed, instead we have our kids memorize the names of the EVIL while teaching them social studies.
Quick test, how many serial/mass murderers can you name? How many Nobel peace prize winners can you name? See which category wins and you have a glimpse of what our culture values.
Oh, and thoughts and prayers to the families of the El Paso and Dayton shootings. You can have those, but I will not be giving up any of my constitutional rights as a concession to mental illness and sociopathic behavior.
Social media posters post dozens of names of suspects after each shooting. Sometimes, the names are accompanied by photos. Invariably, a few get it right long before LE officially confirms the identity.
Sensational mass shooters live somewhere, have families, neighbors, etc.
The public has an insatiable demand for information about the shooter.
If MSM, chose not to disclose the identity, the internet would and intentionally color it with what ever ideology appeals to their viewers, readers and listeners.
Within minutes of LE confirmation of the identity of the Las Vegas shooter was released, pictures of random people that resembled him started popping on the internet. Many are doctored and/ or carry a political tone.
So basically people only need guns at home where the biggest worry is, becuse they wont use it in public for all the reasons you stated.
Not exactly what I stated.....
One can be directly threatened in public as well and in that case a firearm would be necessary. The same could also be true in an active shooter situation. If I hear gunshots, I'm looking for an exit. If by my unfortunate circumstance, I am cornered and someone is shooting at me.. I would respond.
The presence or potential of an armed individual can and often is a deterrent in other crimes. Just not so in an mass shooting when the individual has a death wish.
A poster from the El Paso thread had some good relevant points:
Had this very conversation with a long-time friend recently over the plan to arm school teachers.
He is also a self-proclaimed gun nut. Has two gun safes and it is only because his wife put her foot down that he doesn't have three. I suspect he is carrying nearly all the time. He spends one night a week cleaning various guns and one weekend a month at a gun range.
He was in the military before deciding to be a high school teacher, and is clear that he would never pull out a gun during a mass shooting at his school, and thought it was a stupid idea to arm teachers.
In the first place, he should be focused on his students, getting them to safety.
Secondly, there is a world of difference between the gun range and a gun battle.
And third, he was as likely to get shot by the cops as not.
He had guns in case someone tried to attack him or his family. Other than that, he let the folks who were trained for the task handle matters.
Either the bots are winning or the terrorists are. Hard to say which one has the lead currently.
How do you tell one from the other?
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.
