Results 217 to 228 of 263
05-24-2013, 02:21 PM #217
To attempt t parse through the debate.
IF a gun in your pocket gives you even a 1 in 100 chance of survival in that instance, how could you possibly NOT want it? in a hindsight situation?
If one of the spectators had a gun, and that increased your chances of survival by even as little as 1 in 5, how could you NOT want that chance?
Now, Jab can make a strong argument that a firearm being in the area could have led to additional casualties from missed shots, or even on trget shots that pass trhough the intended target, and I won't dispute that. A responsibile gun owner knows not to shoot if his sight picture isn't entirely clean, meaning even an on target shot that has the potential to pass through your intended target and do damage should be avoided, so RESPONSIBLE, TRAINED firearm usage drops that chance to near zero.
Te anti-gun crowd to me always thinks in absolutes, in a utopian way. Idon't think the understadn that banning guns takes ZERO awy from the criminals. With how many frearms exist in this country, it hardly even dents the future availability of FUTURE criminals getting them, even if they are currently unborn. For some reason, that point jsut does nto appear to sink in. It's better to think of it in a way to assume that all criminlas, now or in the future will have access to firearms for the forseeable future(potentially 100 years or more) even if firearms and ammunition became immediately and completely illegal. Think of it in those terms and tell me you want to deny responsible adult citizens to own a firearm for the purpose of protecting themselves.
If the firearm were to be invented TOMORROW, I would agree that citizns should not be able to own them. Instead, they were invented several hundredyears ago and you can't pu the crap back in the cow, so IMO, it's better to put law abiding citizens on equal footing with those which intend to harm them.
05-24-2013, 03:43 PM #218
honestly Im not even trying to make a point about collateral damage. at least not this time. aurora i certainly was but that was completely different circumstance. i just dont see this particular instance as a reason to be pro or against guns. Maybe its not coming off like that, but i dont see the point in putting a gun in the dead victims hand just to say "at least he had a shot" whether he had an opportunity or not. obviously i wasnt there, and as more comes out ill gladly admit that if he had even the remote ability to use a weapon, he should have, i just dont think he ever did. so whether or not he did have one doesnt change anything that resulted, imo.
to me the notion the crowd or someone within it would react with force within an instance enough to save him just seems far fetched, but id agree someone in the crowd would at least have better use by comparison to the guy that just got ran over and pinned against an immovable object. the crowd did react, after they ran into, ran over, drug, stabbed, tried to behead and moved him into the street. I think it took time to comprehend what they were witnessing, accident or attack. by the time it was seen as an attack and they came forward to stop them, it was too late. they did so regardless that they were unarmed and the attackers were, which to me is an indication they didnt process it was an attack until it was too late for the victim. the crowd to protect themselves i dont argue would have benefited had they tried to kill more, but again knowing they didnt attack anybody else, whether they did or didnt, the result is the same in this case.-JAB
05-24-2013, 03:56 PM #219
JUst from my own persepective, had Ibeen in the crowd, the peopel exiting the car after hitting hm and brandishing a knife wuld probably be line for me to jump in. I they concealed the knife until right beore stabbing him, he likely would have been stabbed once beore I "saved" him. I don't know if that would have saved him or not. So that much we can agree on.
Collateral damage is a very real argument in these types of incidents, but is virtually eliminated with proper training.
05-24-2013, 04:51 PM #220
So if you relate that to the pro or anti gun case, this is exactly what people mean when they say, criminals don't care about the law.We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin
05-24-2013, 05:05 PM #221
05-25-2013, 11:24 AM #222
I'm in the process of getting my first NFA weapon. It's a short barreled AR-15 (12"), chambered to .300 AAC and with a integral suppressor ...
So I've had to deal directly with the BATFE on two occasion so far, both having to deal the required paperwork.
I have to admit. It's been a very professional process thus far. I know they've contacted an old neighbor if mine for the background check.WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.
05-27-2013, 01:12 PM #223
Spoke too soon.
Just checked the mail. My application is on hold due an "irregularity" in my paperwork.
Have to call them tomorrow to find out what it is.
05-28-2013, 12:31 PM #224
05-28-2013, 08:16 PM #225
Can't fire my lawyer for this. Dagger.
I forget I'm carrying sometimes.
05-30-2013, 11:00 AM #226Pro Bowl Russell Street Raven
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
Hey look, the Tea Party and Democrats have found common ground:
I loved this quote justifying that their rights were more important than the Average Joe's rights...
“We face a higher degree of risk because we’re known and people might not like our opinions..."
05-30-2013, 12:23 PM #227
This "higher degree of risk" argument is pure bunk.
The common citizen is far more likely to be a victim of crime than any politician, celebrity, etc.
Glad the measures were defeated. Nice to see there are a more than a few responsible politicians in Texas.
06-18-2013, 03:59 PM #228
Rented a Kimber 1911 at the range yesterday.
Fine firearm. Compared to my compact glock, it had a weight and feel to it that made my glock almost feel like a child's toy. Surprised that the recoil wasn't overwhelming from the first shot. MY tiny little wife noticed it moreso then I(logically) but was accurate from self defense distances, and not overwhelmed. With 2 Glock's in 9mm, I will never buy a smaller caliber for the purpose of reduced recoil again. Reduced ammo cost is another story entirely, will likely train more with 9mm in the future even after a larger caliber purchase.
Not sure if it was the well used rental gun, or my own recoil "apprehension" but I was shooting consistantly 4-5" low at the yellow line distance(50'??? maybe???). Compensated correctly on my last mag and hit 3 straight rounds through the same hole dead center. Pretty happy with that.
I believe a full size, nicely appointed Kimber 1911 is in my future, but with 2 cars that just hit 100k and are nearly paid off, I think I have a couple of major purchases that will precede it. Maybe the 12+ week wait time for "Brady Bill' investigations ill be reduced by the time I am ready. Not sure that I will replace my glock for daily carry purposes, but would more likely become my go to Home Defense weapon. Though, due to my lien of work and requirements as such not requiring me to conceal, the full-sized 1911 poses no problems there. The G19 would be far easier to conceal.