Some restaurant owners worry about customers openly carrying guns

seb said:
Exactly! Many of these shooters plan on dying anyway so they really don't care whether where they are going is an open carry place or not. All they want to do is kill as many people as they can before they themselves are killed or they kill themselves.

Furthermore, if everyone is carrying a loaded firearm these people will probably resort to blowing themselves and all the others around them up, because they are ready to die and they probably really don't care how they kill their victims just as long as they kill a lot of them, so in this case a gun isn't really going to do the person who's carrying it much good. Just look at the Middle East and see how many people are blowing themselves up and that is with a lot of people around them who are armed.
Click to expand...

Guns are just a tool. They don't solve every situation. And sometimes there is no solution, some times you are going to die. I carry a gun for the times I can do something.
 
jonnyghost said:
Guns are just a tool. They don't solve every situation. And sometimes there is no solution, some times you are going to die. I carry a gun for the times I can do something.
Click to expand...

Well I hope you never have to use it and if you ever do, I hope your successful, however, if it doesn't you might be just as dead as the victims. As you said "
guns are just a tool" and there purpose is basically to kill.
 
Its a BIG responsibility to carry a firearm... your life and future pivots on what you do with it.
 
seb said:
. . .

A friend of mine who is a retired cop and his partner were was once in a shootout with them on one side of a car and the person they were shooting at on the other, well after more than 50 shots and no hits on either side it ended when the dude they were shooting at ran out of bullets. When I asked them why they didn't look under the car and shoot at his feet or legs they looked at me and told me that wasn't how they were trained. Common sense and police work don't really go together.
Click to expand...

Well, the confrontation ended with nobody getting hurt, so what's the problem? 50 rounds is one box of ammo divided amongst the three shooters.

Hmmm . . . if someone is shooting at you, the cop, and you're in a safe position, why would you want to stick your head out to look for the other guy's feet?

Also, FBI training (which many police departments use as their standard) discourages shooting under vehicles because of the danger of ricochet off the pavement.
 
seb said:
Not with the shooters in LA, the cops first ran into gun stores and bought weapons that were more powerful than what they carried and then they kept shooting at the center mass as they were trained to do. It wasn't until the shooters decided to end it and shoot themselves in the head that it ended.

A friend of mine who is a retired cop and his partner were was once in a shootout with them on one side of a car and the person they were shooting at on the other, well after more than 50 shots and no hits on either side it ended when the dude they were shooting at ran out of bullets. When I asked them why they didn't look under the car and shoot at his feet or legs they looked at me and told me that wasn't how they were trained. Common sense and police work don't really go together.
Click to expand...

That may not stop the guy from shooting at the police when they tried to arrest the, guy he still would had been able to use his hands to shoot his gun. Your way made no sense to me. I was told a police shot to kill when their life is in danger .
 
whatdidyousay! said:
That may not stop the guy from shooting at the police when they tried to arrest the, guy he still would had been able to use his hands to shoot his gun. Your way made no sense to me. I was told a police shot to kill when their life is in danger .
Click to expand...
The shooter was probably ducked behind the engine block area of the car, not the more open center, so he would be even less visible from the underside because of the wheels. As long as he was contained and the area secure, there's no need to hurry.
 
seb said:
Well I hope you never have to use it and if you ever do, I hope your successful, however, if it doesn't you might be just as dead as the victims. As you said "
guns are just a tool" and there purpose is basically to kill.
Click to expand...

Their purpose is to defend...and terrorists aren't limited to guns. As they demonstrated on the Jordanian pilot, they can set fire to their victims as well and video record the burning. Are you going to ban matches? They've used cars as well, will you ban cars too? They use knives to decapitate their victims and lay their head on the victim's chest - which is filmed. Will you ban knives? How about video recorders since they use that a lot.....

I predict the next terrorist attack will be in another gun free zone where the victims can't defend themselves. It's not a coincidence both of the last two occurred where there was strict gun control. I guess that means either the terrorists can't read or don't care about the strong gun regulations in place.

Laura
 
Reba said:
Also, FBI training (which many police departments use as their standard) discourages shooting under vehicles because of the danger of ricochet off the pavement.
Click to expand...

So I guess hitting someone with an errant shot, say one of the 50 that missed is okay? Doesn't make a lot of sense, let's see look under the car and shoot this guy in the leg or foot and end this thing or lets go until we run out of bullets and hope he does the same or hit some innocent bystander with an errant shot. The FBI is also okay with collateral damage from taking out shooters as long as it's not too high.
 
Lau2046 said:
Their purpose is to defend...and terrorists aren't limited to guns. As they demonstrated on the Jordanian pilot, they can set fire to their victims as well and video record the burning. Are you going to ban matches? They've used cars as well, will you ban cars too? They use knives to decapitate their victims and lay their head on the victim's chest - which is filmed. Will you ban knives? How about video recorders since they use that a lot.....

I predict the next terrorist attack will be in another gun free zone where the victims can't defend themselves. It's not a coincidence both of the last two occurred where there was strict gun control. I guess that means either the terrorists can't read or don't care about the strong gun regulations in place.

Laura
Click to expand...


dont forget to ban the rope too....
 
whatdidyousay! said:
That may not stop the guy from shooting at the police when they tried to arrest the, guy he still would had been able to use his hands to shoot his gun. Your way made no sense to me. I was told a police shot to kill when their life is in danger .
Click to expand...

The police shoot to kill whenever they take their gun out of it's holster. Just look at the recent police shootings where they shoot the person 15, 16, 20 times, they don't stop shooting until they run out of bullets! The Kelso, WA police shot one guy something like 30 times because he was throwing rocks at them and more than half of them were in his back as he was running away!
 
Lau2046 said:
Their purpose is to defend...and terrorists aren't limited to guns. As they demonstrated on the Jordanian pilot, they can set fire to their victims as well and video record the burning. Are you going to ban matches? They've used cars as well, will you ban cars too? They use knives to decapitate their victims and lay their head on the victim's chest - which is filmed. Will you ban knives? How about video recorders since they use that a lot.....

I predict the next terrorist attack will be in another gun free zone where the victims can't defend themselves. It's not a coincidence both of the last two occurred where there was strict gun control. I guess that means either the terrorists can't read or don't care about the strong gun regulations in place.

Laura
Click to expand...

No, the guns purpose was to kill. It's the gun lovers who have put the "it's to defend" spin on it. Whether you're shooting at game or people you're trying to kill it.
 
seb said:
So I guess hitting someone with an errant shot, say one of the 50 that missed is okay?
Click to expand...
Was someone hit by an errant shot?

"Missed"? Depends on what the target was and where the 50 rounds went. If the cops were targeting the car and all their shots hit the car, then those aren't misses.

Doesn't make a lot of sense,
Click to expand...
I'm sure you have a lot more ballistic knowledge and experience than the FBI shooting instructors.

let's see look under the car
Click to expand...
Exposing themselves to gunfire . . .

and shoot this guy in the leg or foot and end this thing
Click to expand...
As has already been mentioned, a shot in a foot or leg doesn't stop someone from being able to shoot a gun.

or lets go until we run out of bullets
Click to expand...
In your scenario, the shooter ran out of bullets, not the cops.

and hope he does the same or hit some innocent bystander with an errant shot. The FBI is also okay with collateral damage from taking out shooters as long as it's not too high.
Click to expand...
I have no idea how you came to draw that conclusion.

The reason they don't shoot at the pavement is to avoid needless casualties.
 
Reba said:
The shooter was probably ducked behind the engine block area of the car, not the more open center, so he would be even less visible from the underside because of the wheels. As long as he was contained and the area secure, there's no need to hurry.
Click to expand...

I didn't say the police had to hurry , I was saying shooting the shooter in the foot won't keep him from firing his gun.
 
seb said:
The police shoot to kill whenever they take their gun out of it's holster.
Click to expand...
Not true.

They shoot to neutralize the threat. Sometimes that results in death, sometimes not. But killing is not the goal; stopping the threat is.

Of course, not every shooting incident turns out with text book perfection, and there are some people who shouldn't be cops.

Also, they don't always even shoot whenever they take their guns out. Sometimes the gun goes back into the holster unfired.

Just look at the recent police shootings where they shoot the person 15, 16, 20 times, they don't stop shooting until they run out of bullets! The Kelso, WA police shot one guy something like 30 times because he was throwing rocks at them and more than half of them were in his back as he was running away!
Click to expand...
Obviously that is NOT every cop, every time. :roll:
 
seb;2456673 The FBI is also okay with collateral damage from taking out shooters as long as it's not too high.[/QUOTE said:
As I recall from the last incident in Boston, terrorists aren't too concerned with collateral damage either....at least law enforcement isn't trying to kill innocents where that's the exact objective of all terrorists.

Laura
Click to expand...
 
whatdidyousay! said:
I didn't say the police had to hurry , I was saying shooting the shooter in the foot won't keep him from firing his gun.
Click to expand...
I know. I said that there was no need to hurry, which means no need to take reckless chances.
 
seb said:
The police shoot to kill whenever they take their gun out of it's holster. Just look at the recent police shootings where they shoot the person 15, 16, 20 times, they don't stop shooting until they run out of bullets! The Kelso, WA police shot one guy something like 30 times because he was throwing rocks at them and more than half of them were in his back as he was running away!
Click to expand...
No they dont..SMDH.
They shoot to eliminate the threat if they are threatened, but because they are trained to shoot in the vital areas, thats where the game changes. They pull their guns and reholster with common sense ( except the trigger happy ones) wish people would get off the police brutality, if idiots would quit breaking the laws the cops wouldnt be all up in your crack.
 
Back
Top