Gun control

Status
Not open for further replies.
sonocativo said:
Do you also know the AR is a hell of a lot cheaper than a deer rifle? That's one reason its their choice $300 for a basic model up to $1000 dressed on the AR's where a deer rifle starts $900-$3000... better made products cost more.
Click to expand...
But, have these shooters bought the basic models? Do some more research on the guns they used and their cost and get back to me on your theory about these wacko's buying the basic models of AR's over a deer rifle.
 
sonocativo said:
No. And even if they were someone would be making them in the black market...for..... yup criminals ! And so now ya gotta throw the high almighty in the mix.... nothing to do with them, just some wacko with a gun and a bunch of law abiding citizens enjoying there day. Then some wacko busts in the door and these innocents protecting themselves praying thank you for god watching over them and living to see another day and Mr wacko going to hell.
Click to expand...
So far not one of these shooters were actually a criminal or even bought any of their weaponry on the black market prior to committing their mass murders. They were mostly mentally ill people who if we had responsible national gun control legislation that vetted out these wacko's in the first place and got them the help they needed, we would not be having this discussion right now.
 
sonocativo said:
No, stop them in their tracks. Called self defense.
Click to expand...
Total nonsense and totally illogical. And how many people are going to die before you get them? This isn't Bruce Willis and this isn't "Die Hard" this is real life and people die for real in the process before the man in white rides into the scene and kills the suspect! The best course of action is to stop the person before they can act and that means keeping the guns out of their hands and getting them the mental health they need or looking them up in a mental hospital and throwing away the key!
 
Last edited:
Reba said:
You are judgmental and nonsensical. Really. There is no logic involved in the above statement.
Click to expand...
No, there is a lot of logic in it, you can't see it because any change in the laws is going to directly affect YOU and you don't want that to happen. If you have nothing to hide, a more invasive background check should not bother you, however, if you have skeletons in your closet than you might have something to worry about. It's kinda like the guy who is married and has had numerous affairs and is asked to take a DNA test; he doesn't really want to do it because he's afraid his wife will find out he has numerous children with a number of women or the past flames will find out their child is his and come after him for support. On the other hand if he's been faithful he has no problem with the test.
 
Reba said:
Because he's humble--that's his motivation. What is your motivation?
- okay, if you say so. I have no motivation in this matter.

He prevented the shooter from continuing his rampage. His original target, the former in-laws weren't at church that day. He knew where they lived, and he had been directly threatening them. He had more guns and ammo left. He wasn't finished.
Click to expand...
-And what proof or evidence do you have that shows the shooter was going to continue his rampage? Maybe he was just after his wife's grandmother? Nobody knows if in fact he was after his former in laws. He may of been after the pastor of the church who had asked him not to come back. Maybe he was going to go off and kill himself. Nobody knows what was going to happen next and anything we can come up with is all just speculation and we will never know.
 
seb said:
Total nonsense and totally illogical. And how many people are going to die before you get them? This isn't Bruce Willis and this isn't "Die Hard" this is real life and people die for real in the process before the man in white rides into the scene and kills the suspect! The best course of action is to stop the person before they can act and that means keeping the guns out of their hands and getting them the mental health they need or looking them up in a mental hospital and throwing away the key!
Click to expand...
If you've taking training and passed your CC licensing you would know a little more about "Observation" apparently you don't. I can go anywhere and for the most part tell you who is cc ! You learn to observe your surroundings, look where your exits are and situate yourself in a safe zone. No I'm not talking playing super hero and being Bruce Willis... But I guarantee you ass, someone up to no good will get some lead in their ass before they put some in mine. You have to be aware of your surroundings and no one wants to pull the trigger as much as the next guy, but to protect yourself and your family you better wake up.
 
seb said:
But, have these shooters bought the basic models? Do some more research on the guns they used and their cost and get back to me on your theory about these wacko's buying the basic models of AR's over a deer rifle.
Click to expand...
Do yours, because they weren't fully dressed, the one in that cali ( I believe California) was a basic Bushwhacker.
 
seb said:
No, they aren't criminals until they act! They are deranged individuals in need of mental help prior to the act.
Click to expand...
No they are criminals who haven't acted yet but have criminal intents....still a criminal just not caught yet.
 
sonocativo said:
If you've taking training and passed your CC licensing you would know a little more about "Observation" apparently you don't. I can go anywhere and for the most part tell you who is cc ! You learn to observe your surroundings, look where your exits are and situate yourself in a safe zone. No I'm not talking playing super hero and being Bruce Willis... But I guarantee you ass, someone up to no good will get some lead in their ass before they put some in mine. You have to be aware of your surroundings and no one wants to pull the trigger as much as the next guy, but to protect yourself and your family you better wake up.
Click to expand...
So your in favor of putting the cart before the horse! I' m in favor of putting it the other way around. Eliminate the threat before they become a threat.
 
sonocativo said:
No they are criminals who haven't acted yet but have criminal intents....still a criminal just not caught yet.
Click to expand...
Talk to a lawyer or the police, they will tell you otherwise. You can talk and say what you are planning to do all you want and no crime has been committed until you act. Your so in favor of the Second Amendment, I would try reading the others as well. You might want to pay attention to the 1st as well as the 4th.
 
seb said:
Talk to a lawyer or the police, they will tell you otherwise. You can talk and say what you are planning to do all you want and no crime has been committed until you act. Your so in favor of the Second Amendment, I would try reading the others as well. You might want to pay attention to the 1st as well as the 4th.
Click to expand...
Guess you never heard of "with criminal intentions" or "pre-meditated" either.
 
seb said:
So your in favor of putting the cart before the horse! I' m in favor of putting it the other way around. Eliminate the threat before they become a threat.
Click to expand...
you don't get it, that's exactly what I said. You observe, that's youre first line of defense. You observe, you identify the threat, then you either avoid the threat by removing yourself from the threat which is #1, engage the threat if theres no other options and once you engage the threat you only have 2 options from there... to disarm or eliminate the threat.... But in doing so it better be within the books as self defense otherwise you are the new criminal. Yeah, everyone will have their opinions and try to be macho, superhero, but in the end your actions are all that matters to the laws and the final outcome is....
Jail
Morgue
or going home to your family.
 
17 pages in, OP has not remarked or posted since. @seb You got anything to do with that?
 
JOEBIALEK said:
The second amendment of the United States Constitution states:



"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Obviously, the need for a state militia has been replaced by the National Guard and Coast Guard, whereby trained military personnel are entrusted with the defense of this country against domestic enemies. Their weapons are tightly controlled and safeguarded.



The only two reasons for a citizen to own a firearm are for hunting or defense of the household from intruders. In either case, ownership of a handgun, shotgun or rifle is more than adequate to satisfy these purposes. There is absolutely no need for any U.S. civilian to own any weapon more powerful or sophisticated than these.



Accordingly, all handguns, shotguns and rifles must be licensed and registered to the degree necessary to match weapon to owner at the click of a computer key. Furthermore, we must guarantee that the mentally ill do not gain access to them under any circumstances. Finally, if we had prohibited the purchase of more sophisticated weapons, several innocent victims would not have died or been harmed at shopping malls, college campuses, Congressional meetings, churches and now concerts. We as a country must deal with this issue immediately lest our society fall back to the days when everyone carried a holster.
Click to expand...
And they should be.... and open carry has already won back a few states. Only thing is open carry makes you a target as criminals will take out any threats to them first, where concealed is a surprise to them.
 
seb said:
As I said earlier, I don't remember which network I was watching.
Click to expand...
Well, isn't that convenient.

As to his professionalism and skill; I seriously doubt he took the time to pick his target and shoot. More than likely, in the heat of battle he shot and luckily hit a spot with no body armor. I've known a number of cops who have been in shootouts and everyone of them have said they were scared to death and just continued to shoot at the suspect. One cop that I know with his partner were in a shootout with a suspect with them on one side of a car and the suspect on the other, after 56 shots and no hits, the suspect ran out of bullets and gave up. These guys were trained professionals, yet their years of training and practice produced zero hits! I think your fooling yourself and perhaps buying in to the NRA and mass media making this into something a lot more than what it is, or you've been watching too many movies.
Click to expand...
It may come as a shock to you but not all LEO are skilled sharpshooters. Not even close. Most police jurisdictions provide only minimal training and practice. Minimal (budget restraints). An NRA instructor is much better trained than your average street cop. Yes, I have discussed this with various LEO.

Shoot 'em up movies? Not interested.

Lets look at what a hero is: A hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself. So lets se if he stacks up to the definition. Yes, he shot this mass murderer but only after he killed 26 people and wounded 20 others, but he stopped nothing, did he go into the church and save lives, no! After the confrontation the suspect was still was able to flea after being shot. Yes, the "hero" gave chase with another person calling in the suspects location, helping the police find the location after the suspect lost control of his car and overturned. The reports are saying the gunman then turned his gun on himself and killed himself. So he doesn't meet the definition of a hero, a true Hero actually stops something from happening or rescues someone or gives their life in the process, he did none of these things, he shot someone who had just killed 26 and wounded 20, nobody was saved, he just carried out justice on this deranged person.
Click to expand...
Most people who act heroically don't consider themselves heroic. People of humble nature especially.

dictionary.com:

hero

1. a person noted for courageous acts or nobility of character

2. a person who, in the opinion of others, has special achievements, abilities, or personal qualities and is regarded as a role model or ideal


Not everyone who acts heroically gets killed. Getting killed is not a heroic action; being willing to take that risk is what's heroic.

Again I ask: what is your motivation for dissing Willeford? How does that help your case for gun control?

Sadly if responsible gun legislation had been passed after 1999, we probably wouldn't be talking about this today because many of these shootings would never have taken place,
Click to expand...
Now who's speculating?

but because we have a do nothing Congress, these shootings will continue on a fairly regular basis: more families will suffer, the President and the Congress will come out and say we need to pray for the victims and that will be it, until the next shooting and it will start all over, again. Sad, truly sad!
Click to expand...
Congress can't change evil hearts.
 
seb said:
No, there is a lot of logic in it, you can't see it because any change in the laws is going to directly affect YOU and you don't want that to happen.
Click to expand...
There is no logic in this statement:

"So you're okay with crazy people owning guns, since they don't show up in the background checks since all they do is put your name in the criminal database and if no hit comes up, you get your gun. Makes a lot of sense to me!"

No one is "okay with crazy people owning guns." You're not making sense.

If you have nothing to hide, a more invasive background check should not bother you, however, if you have skeletons in your closet than you might have something to worry about. It's kinda like the guy who is married and has had numerous affairs and is asked to take a DNA test; he doesn't really want to do it because he's afraid his wife will find out he has numerous children with a number of women or the past flames will find out their child is his and come after him for support. On the other hand if he's been faithful he has no problem with the test.
Click to expand...
You are so off base, it's almost laughable.

No, I have nothing to hide. When I was in the Navy the government (DIS) did a complete background check on me back to babyhood for my Top Secret clearance, and periodically updated.
 
Reba said:
There is no logic in this statement:

"So you're okay with crazy people owning guns, since they don't show up in the background checks since all they do is put your name in the criminal database and if no hit comes up, you get your gun. Makes a lot of sense to me!"

No one is "okay with crazy people owning guns." You're not making sense.

- No the fact that you don't want any changes to the existing laws and keep harping on the law abiding citizens aren't the problem mantra clearly shows that you aren't interested in doing anything to keep the lunatics from buying guns. It's always about me and my rights being violated, never mind that those people who are shot and either killed or wounded by these crazy people who are able to buy guns rights have been violated too.


You are so off base, it's almost laughable.

No, I have nothing to hide. When I was in the Navy the government (DIS) did a complete background check on me back to babyhood for my Top Secret clearance, and periodically updated.
Click to expand...

-We've already gone down this road before, don't you remember my post where I listed the people who were caught spying for other countries who also had top secret security clearance?

-So exactly what kind of background check did they do to you for you to get this top secret clearance? Would you be open to having people having to go through the same thing or something similar inorder to buy firearms? If not, why not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top