drew a weapon and killed the gunman before so many were helplessly murdered. That person would be viewed as a hero. So when we get serious and stop this banning guns we might help solve this issue.
Yeah I know armed citizens only begets more guns. But if I was in the store I would have shot the gunman.
This isn’t a gun issue it’s a mental health crisis. But it’s easy to blame guns. How do we expect to get guns off the streets. It won’t happen so let’s get serious.
Deaths happen every week in Chicago with little mention. Why?
People kill people the gun is the vehicle. A well armed citizen is the best defense for this type of atrocity.
Frankly until we get real about mental health in this country nothing will change. Except more Americans will get concealed carry licenses. And just maybe when the wack jobs know that these people that they kill can fire back nothing will change.
In my opinion a key societal objective is to keep people safe...the linked article shows overwhelmingly that countries having significant gun restrictions have an order of magnitude fewer gun related deaths...you'd be hard pressed to argue that there's no correlation here.
BTW, I know a little bit about guns...while I don't own one, as a teenage I ran a rifle range at a Boy Scouts summer camp...was responsible for ensuring all the younger scouts knew how to handle the gun, clean it and, of course shoot accurately. Later, I shot a military sidearm, BAR and even manned a 5"-38, but that doesn't count...or does it? As Justice Scalia said..."The Second Amendment is NOT unlimited (my emphasis)"...you can't own a piece of artillery and the government has every right to restrict other weapons as well (e.g. AR-15s).
When I hear arguments that say "Law Abiding" citizens should be able to purchase AR-15's, or 'Open Carry' whenever and wherever they choose, I think of the retired Police Captain in your fair state who got upset with a cell phone user in a movie theater (who was checking on the babysitter)...told him to shut it off.. escalation ensures and the cellphoner tosses pop corn at him...so what does this esteemed "law abiding" Police Captain do?...he pulls out his pistol and shoots the "Bad Guy" dead in front of his wife.
And what do we "get" from owning those AR-15s that tips the balance of safety and sanity in that direction?...Anthony Bourdain, in one of his last episodes before his suicide, visited a group of folks in Pennsylvania, I believe, who wanted to show how they used their hard-won access to fully automatic assault rifles (can be done with much oversight)...so after all that 'good citizen' effort, their pride and joy was blowing up some watermelons! So in their minds, it's a fair trade to be able to laugh and giggle at exploding fruit, while children literally have their heads blown open by a similar weapon operated by a here-to-fore unknown non-law-abiding citizen.
Am I making myself clear?
Allowing access to weapons - especially those designed for military use - applies to all citizens...even those who harbor evil intent, but haven't yet run afoul of the law...there's no way of knowing ahead of time, short of subjecting everyone over the age of reason to annual mental evaluations. Arming more and more citizens who carry those weapons outside their homes only increases the chances for lethal outcomes when people get frustrated and angry (i.e. lots and lots of opportunities)...
I'll be happy to provide more evidence as to why ownership of assault rifles or "open carry" is frivolous and juvenile...I suspect that more than a few law enforcement institutions would agree...just imagine responding to an "Active Shooter" emergency, when EVERYONE has a weapon and wants to be the 'Hero'...no thanks.
Your turn...
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Make clear the difference between semi and auto. ARs and AKs are not the only semi auto rifles out there, but those two get the bad rap. What does AR stand for? How many shootings nation wide are by non "assault" weapons? How many by stabbings, beatings, strangulation, blunt force ? Who decides the legal size of a magazine and where is the science behind that arbitrary number? What committee of political hacks are going to be judge and jury? Open carry or conceal and carry are among the safest states. How many were shot and killed by mostly peaceful protesters last Spring and summer and where was the outrage? We want to have discussions about mental health, gun laws, the drug crisis, gang activity, poverty...............have at it. It must be based on fact though, and not feel good emotion that we are doing something.
I should say right off that I support your view on 'Avg. Joe's' w/o training trying to be 'Heroes' intervening in a real mass shooting...only adds to the carnage.
Let me also take a moment to reframe the whole question of citizen gun ownership (I promise to get back to your specific questions)...you may recognize some of my points if you've read through the previous posts...
>There should only be three reasons for a citizen to own a gun...1) Home Defense...2) Hunting...and 3) Sport (Target) Shooting. All other uses are reserved for authorized Police and the Military.
>None of those uses requires large magazines or high rates of fire...a 9mm pistol with 10 rounds should be sufficient for #1...a single shot (or low volume storage) 30-06 for #2...and a .22 long rifle
for #3.
>any weapon with capabilities beyond these is unnecessary and only diminishes community safety.
Now, as to your questions/comments...
>As I've said before, I use the term "AR-15" in an 'exemplary fashion...like an 'Avatar'..but to address your questions straight on, after a little research, the "AR" designation stems from the name of the firm that originally designed it (ArmaLite) back in the late 1950s...again, that specific weapon isn't the issue...it's the 'genre'...more on that to follow.
>You ask about homicides by other means (stabbings, beatings, strangulations, etc.), but don't say why...so I'll have to make my own assumption...It's my guess that you are asserting that 'Assault Rifles' aren't the only means of causing homicides, so why single them out...Everyone acknowledges the fact that there are sadly a wide range of homicidal methods, but when it comes to "Mass Murders, i.e. 10, 20, 30, or more at a time, then those perpetrators have already cast their ballots by choosing Assault Rifles...this is what raises attention and concern for them specifically.
>Q: "Who decides...on magazine size, etc."?...Answer: Congress; States; Municipalities in consultation with numerous knowledgable sources. Note that Justice Scalia wrote an opinion on the 2nd Amendment that included the phrase "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."...several decisions by Appellate Courts have upheld the right of various levels of government to ban certain guns and gun related products.
>C: Open carry or conceal and carry are among the safest states...Reply: First re-visit my opening remarks on the justifiable uses of guns, but add to that my reference to your own admonition of 'Avg.Joe's' walking around in anticipation of using those weapons as 'Heroes'...the more guns that are carried only increases the odds of clueless users creating more loss of life...
Some folks say that 'Law Abiding' "Good Guys" will save us from danger, but if everyone in the population who doesn't have a police record carries a gun, then simple statistics predict we'll have more fatal encounters like the retired Police Captain in Florida I mentioned in an earlier post...shot a man dead in front of his wife in a movie theater because he wouldn't stop using his cell phone (to text his babysitter)...before the shooting everyone would have lauded him as the quintessential "Good Guy" who should be carrying a gun in public. A rarity?...sure, but think of all the un-diagnosed gun owners having a "Bad Day" because their boss just fired them, or their wife left them, and they've been binging on "Call of Duty"...I'm sure you get the picture.
>Q: How many were killed by mostly peaceful protesters last Spring and summer and where was the outrage?"...Reply: Somewhere around 25 people died in protest related shootings, but from my very quick research, the majority were not perpetrated by protesters, but rather 'outsiders' (e.g. Kyle Rittenhouse carrying around his AR-15)...as to the 'outrage', the protests themselves were an expression of outrage for repeated killings of blacks...which some people thought was "unnecessary"...each of those victims family members and friends experienced heart-wrenching loss that an absence of guns outside the home could very well have prevented.
Finally (for now), let me say that the worldwide data on gun deaths is clear...countries with strong gun laws have very low 'body counts'...that's a fact...as Justice Scalia said, the 2nd Amendment is NOT (my emphasis) unlimited...we've already had a temporary ban on assault rifles (without an 'uprising')...Australia banned assault rifles, saw a major drop in gun deaths, and didn't have an uprising. The majority of ALL Americans supports stronger gun laws, and even 25% of NRA members support a ban on assault rifles.
While there are many more things to discuss on this topic, I'd ask you, if you choose to reply, focus first on the "3 Uses" position I put forward and then acknowledge Justice Scalia's statement on the 2nd Amendment (it was for the "Majority" by the way)...
You said: In my opinion a key societal objective is to keep people safe...countries having significant gun restrictions have an order of magnitude fewer gun related deaths...you'd be hard pressed to argue that there's no correlation here.
Take a look at Switzerland, where everyone over 18 years old has an automatic rifle (not the semi-automatic AR). It might be a cultural thing, rather than a gun ownership thing. Although even Israel has fewer mass shootings, because the shooter is usually shot after his first couple victims. Granted, if you have an island, or a non-free people, or both, and control of data collection, you can have great gun death statistics.
And, we know that governments have killed many orders of magnitudes more people than individual gun owners. Individual gun ownership keeps governments 'honest' when it comes to things like contemplated genocide. You want to kill 6 million people?...you have to disarm them first. You want to kill 6 million armed people?...you might think about it twice. If you want to count gun related deaths, include those killed by governments who have safely killed because their population was disarmed. Those numbers show it is safer to live in a society with armed citizens.
BTW, I know a little bit about guns...while I don't own one, as a teenage I ran a rifle range at a Boy Scouts summer camp...was responsible for ensuring all the younger scouts knew how to handle the gun, clean it and, of course shoot accurately. Later, I shot a military sidearm, BAR and even manned a 5"-38, but that doesn't count...or does it? As Justice Scalia said..."The Second Amendment is NOT unlimited (my emphasis)"...you can't own a piece of artillery and the government has every right to restrict other weapons as well (e.g. AR-15s).
Have you ever fired an AR?
The AR, by the way, is just a platform, invented by ArmaLite (the "ArmaLite Rifle"). It is merely type of semi-automatic loading and firing system which is currently used by all kinds of guns in all kinds of calibers. Hundreds of manufacturers use it. Some make AR platform 12 gauge shotguns. Some make AR platform .22LR (.22 long rifle) rifles. You name the caliber, and there are dozens to hundreds of guns using the AR platform to shoot it. The AR lower can accept non-conforming uppers, so you can even buy an AR bolt action, and an AR crossbow (seriously). That's why it is the most popular rifle in America. It is the most versatile, and easy to use firearms platform.
And, AR's don't have to be the dangerous black color that liberals seem to hate so much. You can even get wood stocks for them, so that they look more like what liberals think a gun should look like.
And the caliber the guy used in Colorado was a standard small game (varmint) hunting round.
So, what are you going to ban? There is no way to do it without banning all semiautomatic rifles.
You describe what you want to ban, I will educate you on why your idea won't work. Seriously...give it a shot.
But aside from your inevitable failure in banning guns, the mere effort to try such a ban (assuming you would try to confiscate firearms) would be destructive beyond belief. (If you are only talking about a ban of future sales, nothing will happen, because it won't work.) Confiscation would cost far more lives than are currently being taken on our streets today. I assure you, if you were to try to remove guns from the United States, that would be the end of the United States. That's not a threat from me; that is just an observation....because my goal would be to sit it out, in my recliner, while it all goes down. I'll be watching the revolution on TV with a whiskey in my hand, cursing the people who were naive and stupid enough to think they could get away with a nationwide gun ban. If you thought January 6 was bad (a day in which they all left their guns at home), just try to take guns away from Americans. I can't imagine a more well meaning policy that would have worse effects. And if there is anything I learned on January 6, it is that there are a lot of people out there who get far more upset, far sooner, about things that don't even motivate me to get off the couch. You think those types of people will sit back and disarm? It is silly to even talk about a US gun ban. Even Chris94 knows this. No use closing the barn door after the animals have all escaped.
And what do we "get" from owning those AR-15s that tips the balance of safety and sanity in that direction?
You get a government that fears oppressing its people too much. You're welcome.
Or, if not that, then at least a government that feels it needs to treat the people like a frog in a pot on the stove...turn up the heat and hope they don't notice the increasing water temperature. But, guess what...the frog always jumps out.
There are 4 boxes of freedom, to be used in order of priority and frequency: (1) the soap box (free speech), (2) the voting box, (3) the jury box, and (4) the cartridge box (used only as a last resort, like our Founding Fathers, but the prospect has a deterrent effect). This ain't about blowing up water melons, or any other recreation...although if that is all they get from those weapons, then that means things are going very well in our society. Oh, and by the way automatic weapons are so rare and so restricted, they are very rarely used in killings...I want to say maybe single digits since WWII?
Allowing access to weapons - especially those designed for military use...
"designed for military use"...that undermines your argument.
Many rifles were designed for military use. Take, for example, the Henry Lever action rifle which was standard issue to the US military for years.
But, interestingly, the AR was specifically designed not for military use, and in fact has never been used by the military for that very reason. It was specifically designed for civilian, non-military use. You might want to try a different argument.
BTW, before we get into the subject matter, I'd like for you to send me a 'B-Mail' on how to change text color...
>I'm assuming you took a quick peek at the data I appended, but only cited Switzerland and Israel...two countries with mandatory military conscription (the Swiss allow other types of service). The Swiss have a very long history of pacifism, so I'm not surprised that there's a high percentage of gun owners and low number of gun deaths. As for Israel, we all know that they are in survival mode all the time and must band together...again, a cultural reality that does not create an environment for gun homicides amongst the populace.
You may not have gotten to the bottom of the report, but there's a chart of gun-related death rates for 23 high-income countries...you should take a moment to check it out...spoiler alert...the USA leaves everyone else in the dust (btw, don't forget to include gun-related Suicides, as well). None of those countries would be considered "non-free" and only the U.K. is an island (albeit a fairly large one).
>As for 'Fending off a government (USA?) pogrom of its people', me thinks folks who take that seriously need to seek some assistance for a possible case of paranoia. More likely, it is a severe lack of trust in our democratic system and well over 200 years of weathering all manner of disagreement (the Civil War, notwithstanding...which was fought to actually "Free" people). A disposition for 'Fear' rather than 'Hope' seems to me to be the root cause here. Also, from a practical point of view, if a government wanted to carry out such a program and had the 'muscle' that the U.S. has,...AR-15s might add a few minutes to the 'resistance'.
>Have I ever fired an AR-15?...No, but I fail to see the relevance...my use of the term "AR-15" should be viewed as an "icon" or "avatar" for weapons that are not intended for a) home defense, b) hunting, or c) target shooting. All three of those uses are served by guns that do not require high volume magazines or rapid fire...and all three uses should satisfy any legitimate need for a lethal weapon.
>Your assertion of the "inevitable failure" to ban assault rifles contains some 'over the top' predictions IMHO...We've already seen a temporary ban on assault rifles (1994) without anything approaching what you predict...making it permanent could just as easily go the same way...it certainly worked in a free country like Australia where it achieved dramatic improvements in gun-death statistics. I can't say what a final Bill would look like, but I'd suggest a few 'perks' to soften the blow for those who just can't fathom a day without their assault rifle...set up 'theme parks' that allow (for a fee...hey, this is America) folks who are trained and certified, to shoot automatic as well as semi-automatic weapons...maybe even up to 20mm. There are sanctioned events like this in Arizona already...just commercialize the concept and it's a "Win-Win" for everyone...the Gun-Rights folks get to blast the hell out of a mountain side, while the rest of us can sleep better at night...sound like a plan?
>"...a government that fears oppressing its people too much"...see above.
>"...4 boxes of freedom..."...this concept of a 'government pogrom' is really a thing for you (box 4)...I'd suggest you work harder on strengthening your resolve and commitment to the first three boxes which this country has demonstrated to the rest of the world. Pardon me for "shifting" a bit, but our former President did his level best to tear down the second box (the "Big Lie" and Insurrection), while also mounting challenges to #1 ("The (free) Press is the enemy of the people") and #3 (using the DOJ as his personal legal firm...Bill Barr not allowing Inspectors General to follow through on investigations).
>"...that undermines your argument"...you may have a point, but I don't see it...please elaborate...again the use of the term "AR-15" is 'emblematic'.
So, that's my response to your rebuttal...I thank and applaud you for the responses...here's hoping we can come closer. All citizens should be able to protect their homes and families with lethal force, especially in this day and age...I'm not at all advocating for the removal of ALL guns. Let's care more about the real tragedies being displayed all too frequently right in front of us, as opposed to fears that are more imaginary than real.
(no message)
Ask Tyrone what time is it in Bejing?Communists want to disarm always and first install a Biden
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
shootin’ it up.
(no message)
you know exactly what to in your next one.
can think of a few shooting situations where it would have been good if someone was armed and willing to use it on the perp.
(no message)
Always better to have an armed good guy.
Much better to have a trained good guy who can use the weapon.
P.S. Jaysus, I must be going nuts when I’m complimenting both of yinz.
(no message)
(no message)
You think?
(no message)
Many carry, but many are not properly trained in these circumstances. You shoot, you miss, you hit an innocent. How many are qualified at 20, 30, 40 yards? Then you have average citizen completely outgunned. Also, you don't know if a second shooter is following the initial shooter. You just can't get a permit, buy a slick looking Sig, holster up, tell all your friends, dream of what you would do, then reckoning day comes. Do you try and escort as many shoppers as possible out of harms way or do you try the Navy Seal route? Not an easy answer until it happens to one of us. Get yourself trained and get the proper carry weapon. Learn how to use it, inside and out and get trained.
(no message)
trained right. You pussy. Most of these cowards are mental cases. Who would run away like you at the first sign of danger. Don’t assume you know anything about me.
(no message)
Tough talk on a keyboard. I've been trained and carry a lifetime carry. I know my weapons inside and out. You think this is some type of Hollywood action movie and you're the hero? You can talk tough all you want on an anonymous message board. You need to be trained in an active shooter situation or you're going to get yourself killed along with innocents around you. Know your weapon. Know your abilities. Get yourself trained.
(no message)
it you’re the only one on this board that has been in a decision to take a life. I’m supposed to believe you but I’m just some ignorant poster and pretender. I have nothing to prove to you or could care less. You believe what you want. I could care less what you think of me. I stated an opinion and you chose to ridicule my suggestion and abilities. Yeah that solves everything. How do we make more of you Rambo?
You also have a problem with knowing your weapon and getting properly trained. Don't know why that is so upsetting to you. We will just leave it at that.
why it’s so important to you that you state your abilities while doubting others? I’m curious why you would make accusations about someone’s abilities while informing us all that you know anything. So since we will never meet. I will say you are an expert and should challenge people like me without any knowledge. You have the problem my friend not me. So your opinion and $7.50 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
Try not to respond to me again still obviously I’m full of shit so don’t waste your time. Unless you have another motive which is obvious.
(no message)
(no message)
others killed. Most people with training wouldn't make such claims as you made in the original post.
(no message)
you’re like the guy with a baseball bat or golf club protecting your family with someone breaking into your house. Good luck. I’ll pray for you.
intent to kill? Most and I mean MOST people that make claims like they'd take out an active shooter would cower or blindly shoot hoping they'd hit the target. This is where and how people get themselves or others killed. Now, if you're trained for situations like this, I'm all for you engaging a target one on one. If not, just protect yourself and your family and get the fuck out of Dodge,
Having said that, if it's life or death and you have no way of hiding or exiting the situation, do what you have to to survive.
A golf club is the least of the worries of a criminal who breaks into Domer's house.
the shooter was ex army with weapons training? Does anyone want to discuss the issue. Guess it’s better just to attack the idiot poster with zero information about me. That helps. Hiding is the correct action I guess. I’m been put in my place. What the fuck do I know with all the experts on guns but no solutions. Sounds like America to me.
I think he was agreeing with the "get training" sentiment, though I can't speak for him.
I can see that things escalated with others. I'm out of all that.
First time I've ever seen that on this board. :-)
I got my CCW permit some time ago, but after practicing carrying for a while, I stopped carrying where I live, because I live in a very safe area. I only put it on when I was going into the city.
But, I assume Boulder is pretty safe. If I am to be able to defend against crazy mofo's like that guy, I will have to start carrying all the time. I have a buddy who lives near me and who has a CCW, and he says he never leaves the house without his gun. His gun is just part of his every day outfit...he's been doing it for 15 years now...but he's never fired a shot, of course.
But, this is another issue that will never be solved. People who fear guns are pretty irrational when it comes to that fear. In a past debate about the VTech shooter, someone actually said a shootout would have been worse. Apparently good guys killing bad guys is worse than a bad guy carefully and deliberately hunting down innocent people. The Boulder shooter was carefully hunting people. There was a policeman in there, so there is never a guarantee. But, at least if there is a good guy with a gun, people stand a chance.
I also don’t think anyone needs them so if they do, I really don’t care.
I think law abiding citizens should be able to own and conceal carry.
(no message)
Restricting those rights goes to the heart of being able to protect yourself.
I think so called assault weapon bans are useless. On the other hand since I don‘t play Rambo or hunt with one, I don’t care, and there are plenty of alternatives (just as dangerous by the way).
(no message)
I’m good with personal protection. Also hunt and shoot sporting clays.
Less enamored with nuts having military type arsenals.
(no message)
Not all permit carriers meet those criteria.
We have gotten to the point that all the bad guys can find and carry without much problem. May as well balance it with some good guys.
The only one it will punish is law abiding citizens. How is he going to get the guns out of the criminals hands? The ones registered are easy to find. But in the end, it makes us less safe. But as with the border, Joe doesn't seem to care much about law abiding citizens.
(no message)
(no message)
are barely reported on the news. BLM doesn't care about it and neither does anyone in Washington. Joe is going to take these shootings as a chance to claim racism about something and then pander to more of his radical left side.
(no message)
I would not want to think he was just blowing crap out his arse and pontificating and such.
up a Hand Gun in years. A few years back I had to live in Oakland for 8 months and made a Trip down to Orange County just to get my piece because it was and I felt SO UNSAFE.
This coming weekend there will be Shootings and Deaths in Chicago and you might....MIGHT see a 25 second snippet on the news about it Sunday night or Monday.
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5chblhYqO2I
(no message)