Jump to content
TrumpBGoneSoon

A Serious Discussion about Gun Violence.

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Old Mack said:

So let me put a easyone up here: no citizen needs a high capacity magazine. IMHO these should be for LEOs only.

 

Speaking as a former law enforcement officer, I can honestly say the capacity argument - of all possible arguments regarding firearms regulation - is one of the least valid of all of them.

 

When I started in the Border Patrol, we were issued Beretta 96D Centurion .40 pistols.  Their magazine capacity was 11, when the then active Clinton Gun Ban was in effect, and I used to find it laughable to look at my mags - all stamped "LE/Military Use Only" - and know they held all of one round more than the mandated civilian-legal maximum.  It was as clear an illustration as can exist that the 10 round limit was arbitrary and created by someone who had never heard a shot fired in anger.  It was also useless; even though it was a Federal Felony to be a private citizen in possession of a "LE/Military Use Only" magazine it was painfully common to find criminals in possession of them.

 

In the end, laws of this type are wrong-headed at the extreme; they are based in thinking that if we restrict the rights of the law-abiding that will somehow affect the actions of the criminal.

 

On the other side, there are parts of this country (especially along the southern border) where multiple assailant home invasions are on the rise.  A citizen might find himself fighting to protect his home and family against a gang of criminals, all armed with whatever weapons they might desire (in defiance of the law).  He has to be able to hold off the assault long enough to call for help and then to wait for police to arrive.  It is much easier to survive such a situation if one can maintain sustained fire.

 

As for "only LEO's should have them" I find that a dangerous viewpoint.  This is a nation based upon personal freedom and liberty, and surrendering your rights to the ever more powerful government strips you of your ability to take responsibility for your own security and the safety of your loved ones, and there is no guarantee whatsoever that the police will get there in time to save you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Spartan said:

Speaking as a former law enforcement officer, I can honestly say the capacity argument - of all possible arguments regarding firearms regulation - is one of the least valid of all of them.

 

Spartan...thank you for not shunning me BUT thank you for your service even more.

 

I am not arguing with anyone about guns or laws or anything along those lines.

 

What I did was offer my opinion and as supporter of the 2nd I stand by it.

 

6 hours ago, Spartan said:

In the end, laws of this type are wrong-headed at the extreme; they are based in thinking that if we restrict the rights of the law-abiding that will somehow affect the actions of the criminal.

 

I don't think criminal behavior is going to change no matter what...you put people in jail and than their criminals in there. (in the sense their behavior does not change-it is just restricted)

 

6 hours ago, Spartan said:

On the other side, there are parts of this country (especially along the southern border) where multiple assailant home invasions are on the rise.  A citizen might find himself fighting to protect his home and family against a gang of criminals, all armed with whatever weapons they might desire (in defiance of the law).  He has to be able to hold off the assault long enough to call for help and then to wait for police to arrive.  It is much easier to survive such a situation if one can maintain sustained fire.

 

So you are saying in a home invasion a extend MAG is going to make a difference ? The best weapon is to prevent a home invasion robbery in the first place and be prepared with a plan if one occurs. You know as well as me...that in close quarter combat having effective fire is better than getting the most shots off and hoping one of them is the money hit.

 

I had a friend who was a LEO (not just some guy I knew) and he told he use to practice shooting pie pans at the height of the average mans head. He explained to me that if he ever had to shoot someone during a traffic stop...he would not even have to think about aiming; as it would be second nature. Again you should know most LEOs are shot during traffic stops where unfactors rule. When you have a different situation...like a guy running from a officer and taking pot shoots a high capacity MAG could make the difference. BUT when is a citizen...ever in a similar situation. (discounting your home invasion robbery)

 

6 hours ago, Spartan said:

As for "only LEO's should have them" I find that a dangerous viewpoint.  This is a nation based upon personal freedom and liberty, and surrendering your rights to the ever more powerful government strips you of your ability to take responsibility for your own security and the safety of your loved ones, and there is no guarantee whatsoever that the police will get there in time to save you.

 

A criminal, drunk. psycho with a extended MAG / drum is a lot more dangerous than a viewpoint.

 

I found out about depending on the coppers to save you. I am from Philadelphia / Philadelphia area. If you call 911 there and say GUN there is a officer on scene within 5 minutes. I now live in the sticks of East Tennessee. Two times I called the police because of my neighbor discharging a firearm to intimidate me. It took a lone officer 39 minutes the first time and 41 minutes to get here the second time.

 

I can make town (doing the speed limit) in ten minutes. The second time 2 officers pulled up at the same time. (after my neighbor unloaded a full MAG-it wouldn't surprise me if one of them waited for the other.)  I wouldn't even had bothered to call the police except when he threatened to kill me. I was sitting on my deck with my GF...I was not scared of him...I was concern from GF.  My (new) neighbor (maybe a visitor) already showed his colors and there were little kids there when he did it. I can  not afford to have any trouble because the next time I do...I'm going to jail ; as I have used up all of my Get Out Of Jail Free cards.

 

Bottom line: I am pro-gun BUT that doesn't blind me !

 

Also note: if you give the GOV more power or even if they take it; you will never get it back.

 

And once they have it...their already thinking about how they can get more.

 

 IMG_0720.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2018 at 4:59 PM, Spartan said:

 

You're welcome!  Thank you for your efforts to at least try and create opportunities for honest, civil give and take!

 

 

The Stephen Paddocks of the world are horrifying anomalies; they do not define the majority.  Their actions appall us and disgust us, but such people have existed since the dawn of humanity.  Let's not forget that while the Las Vegas shooting killed around 50 people; the Happy Land massacre of 1990 killed 87 people, all killed not with guns but with gasoline and a match. 

 

It's easy to blame the implement.  Yes, guns do have enormous potential for abuse; but there are ways to address that that do not attack the rights of the responsible gun owners.  Like it or not we DO have a Constitutionally-guaranteed right to be armed, which means that the risk of abuse is increased; but I find living in a free society worth the risk.  I know, especially as a former law enforcement officer, that our protections of civil rights means that many violent criminals escape consequences for their crimes and are free to commit more; but as Benjamin Franklin once wrote: "That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer."  Many violent individuals are free today because of our system, but again I find that risk worthwhile.

 

When it comes to firearms, most regulations proposed by gun control advocates do not bring benefits sufficient to counter the damage done to our individual rights and liberty they would certainly create.

 

So, the question is: what do we do about it?  

 

It has long been my belief that we need to return Civics as a class to our public schooling curriculum.  Too many Americans are ignorant about the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights.  How do we protect our rights when our citizenry doesn't understand what they are??  Personally, I feel that basic firearms safety and martial riflery should be part of the high school curriculum; that way everyone understands firearms safety, handling, and the reasons for why such is important.  Disband the National Guard and restore a true militia system that everyone spends time serving in; conscientious objectors could serve in roles like medicine or support staff.  Let all citizens be personally invested in serving their communities; once they complete their service - after, say, two years? - they would be vetted, trained, and equipped to own whatever small arms they wish.  Make sure they have access to supplemental training and facilities to practice and maintain proficiency.

 

We would end up with a stronger, more disciplined citizenry, and one that is far safer and more self-reliant than what we have become.

I'm not opposed to properly trained and vetted armed security in public places like schools.  Many schools already have that.  

 

I also see that schools and businesses are training their students/employees to react in a active shooter scene. 

 

But it doesn't address the fact that there are a lot of holes in gun laws already in place.  It also doesn't address the fact that there an uncountable amount soft targets.  Bars, Concerts, Religious buildings, etc...

 

Everyone wants to stop the mass shootings but we can't agree on the methods.  It's a very complex problem with everyone's life at stake.  Most American's don't own a gun and don't want in an America where they need one.  But those that do have a right to defend themselves.   

 

I totally agree that gun control is "Winning the problem" Not solving it.  Where is the line drawn?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRA told doctors to 'stay in their lane' when it comes to gun deaths — and doctors are posting furious, devastating responses

  • Just hours before the deadly shooting in Thousand Oaks, California, the NRA tweeted out an angry rebuttal of a position paper authored by the American College of Physicians.
  • The paper in question wrestled with how to reduce gun injuries in the US and called for a "multifaceted and comprehensive approach to reducing firearm violence that is consistent with the Second Amendment."
  • The NRA blasted the paper, telling doctors to "stay in their lane."
  • Doctors quickly pushed back, saying that gun violence is very much their business, since they're the ones who stop the bleeding and save lives after people get shot.
  • One doctor asked, "where are you when I'm having to tell all those families their loved one has died?"
 

The National Rifle Association, the most powerful gun lobby in the country, is under fire from doctors for a Tweet that many are calling insensitive and ill-reasoned.

On Wednesday, just hours before a gunman stormed into a bar in California and killed 12 people, the NRA went after the American College of Physicians on Twitter for writing about policies that could reduce the number of deaths and injuries from firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 4:58 PM, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

Lets clear the air here.  I won't address any personal attacks nor will I make any in this thread.

 

I don't oppose people buying handguns for self defense.  Experts recommend it.

I don't oppose people buying rifles for hunting and target practice.  Shoot as much as you want at the range.

 

However, Guns are cheap and plentiful and often falling into the hands of people who abuse them to the point of getting a lot of other people killed.  

 

There's a lot of talk about flagging folks with mental illness.  But its hard to pinpoint the actual shooters until they have done the act.  We talk about training teachers to use guns.  Teachers may not want to have that additional responsibility.   Any effort to restrain access to guns is often defeated by the NRA.   Classic NRA is very different from the Modern NRA.   It's about money.  

 

 However, I'm not opposed to armed security in our public schools.  

 

I don't want to win this problem, I want to solve it.  

You ask a good valid question. My son is a high school math teacher and I have asked him the same question (should teachers be allowed to carry?) and he was not totally against the idea, however, he was kind of disgusted that he cant get the funds he needs for books/computers etc, but they will train him to carry and supply him a weapon. He agreed better equipped security forces are needed, but drew his line at teachers packing. Perhaps that will change when his own daughter is old enough to start school?..

 

As I told him. If you are armed with a handgun and someone shows up with an AR15/assault rifle. You are in deep trouble. That said. If the only thing between my child and a lunatic with a gun is a teacher with a handgun. I'll take it,  and pray he/she has the time and means to figure out a way to get the drop on the shooter..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

 

Spartan...thank you for not shunning me BUT thank you for your service even more.

 

Thank you for that!  It is appreciated.  I don't "shun" people over their beliefs; I find it much more rewarding to have a respectful conversation with someone who has a different view than I.  I've always said that talking to someone means you might learn something.

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

 

I am not arguing with anyone about guns or laws or anything along those lines.  What I did was offer my opinion and as supporter of the 2nd I stand by it.

 

Fair enough.

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

I don't think criminal behavior is going to change no matter what...you put people in jail and than their criminals in there. (in the sense their behavior does not change-it is just restricted)

 

I think you're right.  From the dawn of humanity we have had those who choose to prey upon the innocent and to defy the laws of their society, and I believe we always will.  In the end, people need to understand that, acknowledge it, and prepare for it.

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

So you are saying in a home invasion a extend MAG is going to make a difference ? The best weapon is to prevent a home invasion robbery in the first place and be prepared with a plan if one occurs. You know as well as me...that in close quarter combat having effective fire is better than getting the most shots off and hoping one of them is the money hit.

 

Any home defense plan should have layers; from a strong perimeter to effective deterrents like lights and a good alarm system.  Each level of difficulty you add is going to peel off layers of criminals.  A simple sign saying you have an alarm system will deter some.  Motion sensor lights coming on deter others.  An alarm going off will send others fleeing.  But... for those who know to disable the alarm system and cut the phone lines and cut the power now you get into the nightmare scenario: dedicated and committed bad guys who won't stop trying to get to you.  The first moment shots are fired some of those bad guys will finally break and run... but there are those criminals that even that won't convince them to end their assault.  Those are the ones that are your very worst case scenario, because at that point no matter what somebody is going to die.

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

I had a friend who was a LEO (not just some guy I knew) and he told he use to practice shooting pie pans at the height of the average mans head. He explained to me that if he ever had to shoot someone during a traffic stop...he would not even have to think about aiming; as it would be second nature. Again you should know most LEOs are shot during traffic stops where unfactors rule. When you have a different situation...like a guy running from a officer and taking pot shoots a high capacity MAG could make the difference. BUT when is a citizen...ever in a similar situation. (discounting your home invasion robbery)

 

Wyatt Earp is reported to have said: "Speed is fine but accuracy is everything."  My grandfather taught me that, and also about the concept of "take your time, fast."  But, I also learned that a man who can put every round into the same hole on the range will rarely be able to match that level of performance when lives are on the line.  One of my instructors once said that under stress you would only be about half as good as your worst day at the range; part of why I dedicate a lot of my training to "fast accuracy."  I figure if I can draw and put two rounds into the x-ring at 10 yards and keep my times at right about a second I'm doing pretty well.

 

I can also cite several situations where a private citizen having high capacity mags saved lives.  It's rare, certainly; but my father once taught me to "live for the best case but plan for the worst case."  Admittedly, I also experienced a situation as a Border Patrol agent where having lots of ammo saved the lives of myself and another agent when we found ourselves under assault by heavily armed human traffickers, and having the means to keep up sustained fire mixed with opportunities to fire occasional precision shots was the difference between life and death; so I might have a little bias in that area.

 

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

A criminal, drunk. psycho with a extended MAG / drum is a lot more dangerous than a viewpoint.

 

Which is what behooves one to have the means to deal effectively with such a situation.  Everybody dies, and there is such a thing as a no-win situation, but I believe strongly in skewing the odds my way as aggressively as I can.

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

I found out about depending on the coppers to save you. I am from Philadelphia / Philadelphia area. If you call 911 there and say GUN there is a officer on scene within 5 minutes. I now live in the sticks of East Tennessee. Two times I called the police because of my neighbor discharging a firearm to intimidate me. It took a lone officer 39 minutes the first time and 41 minutes to get here the second time.

 

I can make town (doing the speed limit) in ten minutes. The second time 2 officers pulled up at the same time. (after my neighbor unloaded a full MAG-it wouldn't surprise me if one of them waited for the other.)  I wouldn't even had bothered to call the police except when he threatened to kill me. I was sitting on my deck with my GF...I was not scared of him...I was concern from GF.  My (new) neighbor (maybe a visitor) already showed his colors and there were little kids there when he did it. I can  not afford to have any trouble because the next time I do...I'm going to jail ; as I have used up all of my Get Out Of Jail Free cards.

 

I grew up in the Southwest, in a community where if the Sheriff's Department was in the starting blocks just waiting for my call they would still take a minimum of 20 minutes to get there.  Where I live now it's worse: nearly 30 minutes.  So, I know that help might be a long time coming.  Fortunately, my wife and I are both experienced knowledgeable shooters who understand tactics and have even taken a couple of training classes in small unit tactics, so I figure we'll acquit ourselves well if the flag ever flies.

 

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

Also note: if you give the GOV more power or even if they take it; you will never get it back.

 

And once they have it...their already thinking about how they can get more.

 

That's the truth!  And THAT is my biggest concern over anything else just about.

 

16 hours ago, Old Mack said:

 

 IMG_0720.jpg

 

 

 

This is the point where I can hear every instructor I ever had bellowing: "FINGER!" at the top of their lungs....  😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

I'm not opposed to properly trained and vetted armed security in public places like schools.  Many schools already have that.  

 

I also see that schools and businesses are training their students/employees to react in a active shooter scene. 

 

I think my plan helps improve that, through the fact that everyone has training and everyone can contribute to defending children should the unthinkable happen.

 

3 hours ago, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

But it doesn't address the fact that there are a lot of holes in gun laws already in place.  It also doesn't address the fact that there an uncountable amount soft targets.  Bars, Concerts, Religious buildings, etc...

 

Again, I think if we had a society of trained militiamen such problems would be addressed.  People prone to mental illness and violence would be identified during their militia service, and barred from firearms ownership.  Inner city kids would have more opportunities through training and career training received during their militia service and would be more invested in their communities as well, so they would be less likely to turn to crime.  Those that did turn to crime would probably have been identified, and would know that their would-be victim pool is better armed and capable which would provide some deterrent value as well.

 

3 hours ago, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

Everyone wants to stop the mass shootings but we can't agree on the methods.  It's a very complex problem with everyone's life at stake.  Most American's don't own a gun and don't want in an America where they need one.  But those that do have a right to defend themselves.   

 

Frankly, I think too many people want to abdicate their own responsibilities to society and want someone else to be responsible for their lives and security.  If someone doesn't want to live in an America where they have to be responsible for themselves then they don't understand what America is all about IMHO.

 

3 hours ago, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

I totally agree that gun control is "Winning the problem" Not solving it.  Where is the line drawn?  

 

I personally don't see that gun control is "winning the problem"; much less solving it.  I think it's a wrong-headed policy that is actually contributing to the problem instead of doing anything to improve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2018 at 12:08 AM, Old Mack said:

The best weapon is to prevent a home invasion robbery in the first place and be prepared with a plan if one occurs. 

 

Just read this at a Army site...thought you might enjoy it: 

 

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more
important than either. The final weapon is the brain...all else is supplemental.
 

On 11/11/2018 at 5:01 PM, Spartan said:

I think you're right.  From the dawn of humanity we have had those who choose to prey upon the innocent and to defy the laws of their society, and I believe we always will.  In the end, people need to understand that, acknowledge it, and prepare for it.

 

Was just telling a friend of mine one of my favorite fables the other night.

 

Anyhow...I said / say is There are people in this world...who if they hit the Powerball and bought that million dollar home next to you;  would still steal your hubcaps. Not they that they needed them or anything...it's just the way they are.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Fascist Gun-Free Zones -

(and the Adolescent Liberal Malcontents that Applaud Them)

 

London's murder rate hits grim milestone after spate of bloodshed

 

The number of murders in London so far this year has now matched the total in the whole of 2017,

a grim milestone that will fuel the debate of how to tackle rising crime.

 

Knife-Crimes.jpg

 

Liberals-Attack-The-Gun-Issue-Cartoon-Li

 

Ha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been repeatedly told in this thread that guns aren't part of gun violence in America.  There's plenty of evidence to prove that wrong.

 

Israel, Australia, Switzerland and China have stricter gun control laws than America and they don't have the same problem with public shooting like we do.  Switzerland requires every male to serve 280 days in the militia and even gives them a gun.  However, They've also banned automatic firing guns.  They require annual background checks and limit the ammo that can be purchased.  

 

So, Its hard to honestly say that the quick availability of guns is not a factor in all these public shootings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

I've been repeatedly told in this thread that guns aren't part of gun violence in America.  There's plenty of evidence to prove that wrong.

 

Israel, Australia, Switzerland and China have stricter gun control laws than America and they don't have the same problem with public shooting like we do.  Switzerland requires every male to serve 280 days in the militia and even gives them a gun.  However, They've also banned automatic firing guns.  They require annual background checks and limit the ammo that can be purchased.  

 

So, Its hard to honestly say that the quick availability of guns is not a factor in all these public shootings.

HEY DUMBASS LOOK WHERE MOST OF THE GUN VIOLENCE IS... IN MAJOR CITIES RUN BY LIBERALS!!!!

NOT A GUN PROBLEM... IT IS A LIBERAL PROBLEM!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duck, I'm running a serious thread.  Without even reading your post, I know that you're utterly incapable of debating the issues and have failed to follow the spirit of this thread.  So I ask nicely that you stay out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

Duck, I'm running a serious thread.  Without even reading your post, I know that you're utterly incapable of debating the issues and have failed to follow the spirit of this thread.  So I ask nicely that you stay out.

AH SO YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE FACT THAT MOST GUN VIOLENCE HAPPENS IN LIBERAL RUN CITIES? ESPECIALLY CHICAGO... GOT IT!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TrumpBGoneSoon said:

Stay on ignore then.  

POOR LITTLE PUSSYBOY CAN'T DEFEND HIS FAKEASS POINT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Duck615 said:

POOR LITTLE PUSSYBOY CAN'T DEFEND HIS FAKEASS POINT

Your problem Dick666 is you are a little man with a big mouth. A little man who gets a hard-on every time he sees a gun and ejaculates if allowed to touch one. Try using your fists little man instead of a gun - people wont die and little men like you will keep their mouths shut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Yukon said:

Your problem Dick666 is you are a little man with a big mouth. A little man who gets a hard-on every time he sees a gun and ejaculates if allowed to touch one. Try using your fists little man instead of a gun.

LMFAO another keyboard fukking pussyboy heard from

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2018 at 3:12 PM, QWAQWA64 said:

You ask a good valid question. My son is a high school math teacher and I have asked him the same question (should teachers be allowed to carry?) and he was not totally against the idea, however, he was kind of disgusted that he cant get the funds he needs for books/computers etc, but they will train him to carry and supply him a weapon. He agreed better equipped security forces are needed, but drew his line at teachers packing. Perhaps that will change when his own daughter is old enough to start school?..

 

As I told him. If you are armed with a handgun and someone shows up with an AR15/assault rifle. You are in deep trouble. That said. If the only thing between my child and a lunatic with a gun is a teacher with a handgun. I'll take it,  and pray he/she has the time and means to figure out a way to get the drop on the shooter..

Sorry I missed this post.  I'm sure your son is a good man and has given this subject a lot of thought.  Schools are training students and teachers how to survive an active shooter.  I'm sad that its necessary but I'm glad its being done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ask trumpbgone to explain why gun violence is so high in cities run by liberals??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Duck615 said:

LMFAO another keyboard fukking pussyboy heard from

 

Duck615, (on the left) speaking with his only friend, in their native language.

Butt-head Beavis face hair cartoon facial expression nose man yellow smile text emotion cheek human behavior male friendship head laughter hairstyle art comics forehead boy fictional character fiction mouth conversation illustration facial hair communication child

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stood in line over 2 hours friday to get my conceal weapon. been carrying a big gun but kind of irritating at times. several women in line in front of me were buying 5 shot 357's to catty in purses and several were getting 380's. Most have become afraid of simple things like trips to the mall. Got to counter and they rejected my background check. called next morning and it was cleared up. I asked how this happened and of course they didn't have a clue. State patrolman and sheriffs officer were buying semi automatic rifles. got to get my gun up to shooting range to learn it before I start carrying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...