Here we go again ...

Posted by: six_of_one

Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 01:51 PM

... sigh.

12 injured during New Orleans Mother's Day parade shooting

Still braking, so details slim ...
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 03:18 PM

The NRA leadership will say the victims are just left wing props. And Alex Jones will have video to prove it's a WH plot. And I hope every f'n senate sh¡tbag — Repugnican or Demicrap — that filibustered or voted against the last gun vote contracts combustible polyps.
Posted by: DLC

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 04:16 PM

Does the name "Dodge City" ring a bell ?? crazy

Dumb MoFos ! mad
Posted by: MacGizmo

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 05:29 PM

I'm 100% behind gun control. But let's not kid ourselves into thinking that a more thorough background check would have prevented this. You just can't vet out stupid sick people with a paper questionnaire.
Posted by: Leslie

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 06:00 PM

Of course not. BUT, background checks should decrease the number of guns out there and that is the intent.
This whole gun discussion is about slowing/decreasing the senseless slaughter. It is not going to happen overnight; other than a quickie, not much does. However, it is a step in the right direction, well if and when it happens.
The crazies will always be out and we will always be playing catch-up. That is the nature of that beast. No different than trying to catch bank robbers, computer hackers, etc..

Except the frequency and devastation of these situations is without equal.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 06:18 PM


+1

You have such a way wit words! grin



Posted by: DLC

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 06:57 PM

Bingo ! It's going to take many things and a lot of time...

The NRA keeps saying "This won't do it!" and "That won't do it !" . . . like we need 1 single thing !!!!

That's like trying to regulate traffic and eliminate traffic deaths with 1 law !! It takes many ! Each will contribute to a decline in deaths and saves lives... together many lives will be spared and many families not decimated !! NRA doesn't want to acknowledge that !!!! mad
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/12/13 06:57 PM

Colon-Bustable polyps... snicker.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 02:48 AM

Jim, the word is DETERRENCE. Let's not let perfect become the enemy of good.
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 11:20 AM

Originally Posted By: steveg
Jim, the word is DETERRENCE. Let's not let perfect become the enemy of good.

Yep. A background check is just another roadblock. In some cases, that alone may stop someone from proceeding with their plans; for others, at least you've made proceeding that much more difficult ...
Posted by: MacGizmo

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 11:35 AM

I guess we should expect nothing more than bandaids from our government... because that's all they've ever done to solve real problems. Anything more than that would require them to stop campaigning and actually do something — and I'm not sure they're capable.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 12:14 PM

When I had the Kryptonite Lock account years ago, the operative promise was that it can deter bike thieves. The product did not automatically kill every last bike thief on the planet.

The only way you can completely eliminate gun violence is to globally render firearms inaccessible to every human on the planet. Even vacating the 2nd Amendment wouldn't solve the problem. The next best thing is some level of control. And if you've been paying attention, you've seen how the gun lobby, most Repugnicans, and even a handful of Democraps have torpedoed even a bandaid.

Have you got anything stronger — that would make it through both chambers, that is?
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 01:25 PM

Quote:
Have you got anything stronger — that would make it through both chambers, that is?


The only thing making it through the chambers today... is more bullets. cool
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 01:39 PM

Funny in a very very sad way. frown
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 02:35 PM

I used to be against term limits but I think Giz is right when he says that the anointed ones never stop campaigning. Term limits might be an answer to the problem. I also think that even if term limits aren't implemented, it's time to amend the Constitution so that presidents are elected for 6-yaer terms, as are senators, and representatives are elected for four year terms. Reps. in particular are always electioneering because no sooner is one election over than they have to gear up for the next . Two year terms may have made sense in the 18th century, but not today.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 03:12 PM

Good luck on that ...changing the Constitution.
There are some people in this country who think the Constitution is higher than Moses and the 10 Commandments on stone tablets....

Besides... when I think of having Bush for 12 years instead of the miserable 8 we had... I wanna be sick.
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 03:19 PM

Yeah--there's that too.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/13/13 04:17 PM

Originally Posted By: NucleusG4
Colon-Bustable polyps... snicker.


. . . .
Posted by: DLC

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:00 AM

Maybe after 6 he would have been replaced. He didn't win by a lot in '04!! We might have had him 2 years LESS !! grin
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:05 AM

From what I gather from the chief is that this happens at these things. You got drunk crazy doped up bungies getting in each others faces. Most of the time it doesn't happen with this many people . Of course, it sure does help to fan the flames when the media is salivating over incidents like this when a gun is mention and they sure dd count every one especially the kids who got some scratches,

It's got all the great stuff to make a story. Of course it might help even more if a rich fat headed mayor gets into the fray clamoring for more restrictions that would absolutely no freakin good. Or a president gets weepy eyed on national news. grin


Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:12 AM

Well, any president for that matter.

What I've seen the last three presidents including the current one is that in the second term, the so called lame duck term, the president attempts to creat a legacy for him self.

Dave
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:14 AM

Oh, so then it's ok in your opinion? No big deal? SOP?

Good luck with that POV.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:19 AM

Yep. These things happen. And always have. So what?
Do they have to continue? Can we trim it down a bit?
Would you even be wiling to try?

Maybe if everyone there would have been armed...they would have killed those guys.
Maybe that reaction would have been excessive... since in the end no one died.

Or maybe, and in my mind more likely, there would have been absolute mayhem and everyone would start pulling out their weapons and there would be no telling who did what... or how many would be left dead in the end.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:21 AM

Just had a thought... being armed is supposed to make you feel safer. More able to protect yourself.

If I'm a crazy dude intent on harming people...I'm taking you out first.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:22 AM

Purchased this yesterday.

http://www.ruger.com/products/lc380/models.html

The sweet firing, slender , concealable , Ruger LC380. It fires .380 Auto. Ammo for it is mostly available . Whereas 9mm is limited.

Then I went to Amazon and purchased a LASER sight made just or it.

http://www.lasermax.com/Products/GunConfigurator.aspx

Now to find a holster .

Dave
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:27 AM

That's super! Are you posting that in here to as flame bait? Cuz I couldn't care less. As long as you have passed any required laws to buy your weapon...
That's all we want... stricter measures to keep every lunatic who wants a weapon from having super easy access to one.
I know, I know... that's just sooo far f'n out there.... why would any sane person want such a thing?


You seem to think we have a problem with guns per se... we don't. That's what you guys don't understand... and why your response is "guns don't kill people...people kill people" Exactly! guns aren't the problem... it's the "people" who can have access to them.

Nice looking gun. A little too small for my big hands though.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:49 AM

I haven't read the latest on the incident this morning. I don't know exactly what happen. From what I read earlier there might have been three individuals shooting. We're they shooting at each other? Were they targeting each other specifically? Meaning, did one or more of them go there for that purpose? Was one trying to prevent the other from harming others? I don't know.

As for having armed citizens, it's not about the number of people being armed its more about having them trained and practiced. One of the big decisions when confronting a bad guy is determining if one can help the situation, not make it worse. Most traing classes stress the teaching of this. I haven't taken it yet so I dont personally know how effective it is. Evidently it is as there are extremely few, I mean rare, that a CCW holder gets in a gun battle.

And, one must have practice with it. It's a must, IMO.

I hope they get to the bottom of this. I'm sure they will.

Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 07:08 AM

Flame bait? No not really. If this does get politicall, I hope it gets moved over to the Soap box.

I mentioned the Ruger as I have been researching a smaller concealable weapon and was looking at this one specifically. Handguns have been rather hard to find in many shops. Especially ones that seem to be designed job specific. The LC380 is the same size as the popular LC9 which is in 9mm but because of the round, has a snappy recoil. The .380 is a good match for the weight. And because its a single stack, only holding 7 rounds, it is thin making it nicer to conceal.

Some guns are rather easy to find, like glocks which haven't been changed much in 20 years and are totally reliable.

Two other guns I was interested in were the Smith and Wesson M&P Shield which is extremely hard to find and has waiting times I'm months. Also there is the Ruger SR22, which is chambered for the .22 long rifle cartridge. The .22 round gives guns fits as ammo in that cartridge is unreliable in many models of guns. But the SR22 seems to handle them all very well. Also it shoots great and is not expensive. So since .22 ammo is cheaper, fun to shoot.

Me, I want to get into it more.

Dave
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 07:48 AM

Very much like the Beretta .380 — with which I damned near shot a plain clothes cop a few decades ago.

I'm curious... A laser sight? Self-defense is usually up close and personal, whereas a sighting aid suggests shooting from a distance of 10 yards or more from your target. And the holster, which means CCW, where home defense wouldn't necessarily require a holster.

I mean, it's your business and your 2A right. But your choice of accessories hints at a more aggressive rationale.

I'm just sayin'...
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 07:58 AM

C'mon Steve... he sleeps with it.
Posted by: Leslie

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 10:05 AM

Then maybe the laser sight is used a night light.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 10:11 AM

To see what???? Pray tell...... shocked
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 10:20 AM

Better for peeing in the dark? blush
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 10:22 AM

Puhleez! The client with whom I bartered the Benz is never without an ankle holster. crazy
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 10:31 AM

And the hits just keep on comin'. So, Wayne the Pain, tell us what stops a STUPID guy with a gun? A bigger idiot with a bigger gun? smirk
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 11:25 AM

Yes... if you give weapons to idiots, then crap is gonna hit the fan.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/13/gun-in-purse-starbucks_n_3268652.html
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 11:38 AM

Background check? How about a f'n IQ test? mad
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 12:36 PM

It's not hard to scour the reports all over the country to find about anything one is looking for. So this happens. Most likely the handgun was in te purse, with some contents hitting the trigger

Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 12:38 PM

The LASER has been shwn to give better accuracy over traditional sights especially in reduced lights.
As for the holster. Of course I want a holster . I will need a way to contain it. Otherwise if iput it someplace like a purse it would be less secure.

Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 12:44 PM

It's been my experience that F'n IQ tests are more complicated than background checks.

Dave
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 12:51 PM

Okay, so here's what i don't get:

The pro-gun position is "guns don't kill people, people kill people" ... so let's tackle just the "people" side of things:

If the solution is preventing people with criminal or mental issues from obtaining guns (as opposed to getting rid of guns themselves), how does that happen without checking those person's backgrounds?

And since you don't know beforehand who those people are, how can you identify just those people without running a check on every person wishing to buy a gun?

In short: how do we prevent the "bad guys" from having guns without a check of some sort?
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 01:11 PM

From what I here on this incident, the perp has a long history of violence.

Dave
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 01:45 PM

Jebus, Dave! Did you tai an extra apologist pill today?
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 02:00 PM

Quote:
It's not hard to scour the reports all over the country to find about anything one is looking for.


Exactly. That's a double edged sword you're
swinging there....
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 03:10 PM

Swords don'k kill people. Zorro do! shocked
Posted by: DLC

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 04:06 PM

Originally Posted By: steveg
Swords don'k kill people. Zorro do! shocked

And Zorro was a gay blade !! I saw the movie documentary !! wink
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 05:58 PM

Originally Posted By: MrB
From what I gather from the chief is that this happens at these things. You got drunk crazy doped up bungies getting in each others faces. M <snip>

Dave


MOTHER'S DAY PARADES?!?!?!?! REALLY?!?!

"DOPED UP"??? REALLY???

To the best of my knowledge there's N*E*V*E*R
been a shooting @ A MARIJUANA DAY PARADE!

Maybe we need to outlaw Mother's Day Parades
...Or Just MOTHER'S DAY... or Just MOTHERS!

Or maybe, just maybe,
JUST THE CHICKEN MOTHAS Carrying Weapons
to ALL Parades. mad

If you think you're so friggin' Big & Bad
WTF Do You Need w/A GUN To HIDE BEHIND?


Catch A CLUE!
450,000 people for 3 DAYS
w/only 2 deaths, both accidental.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:16 PM



Addressing the fact that it was
A MOTHER'S DAY PARADE
(and per MrB's last admission of
being all-up with arming children)

given my twisted sensaumma the first
thing that leapt to mind was that
The Shooter May-Have-Been A KID!

now wouldn't that be a kick in the head? smirk
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 06:42 PM


OK... You struck a nerve, now deal with it...

Reboot once called me during a tangle
for being "UNhippy-like" to which I replied,
"Don't ever try to pigeon-hole me!"

Now allow me to elaborate:
"San Fran Hippy" = all Peace & FlowerPower
"N.Y.City Hippy" = A Much Tougher Breed.

I said I never made it to Woodstock because
I'd "stayed home to hold down the fort"...
"THE FORT" the Digger's Free Store in the
Bowery. I was easy to pick out, I was the
cute one with the big boobs, and a shotgun
across her knees guarding the 13-17 y.o.
run-away kids left in her charge.

I'm still not "gun-shy", in fact I went on
to TEACH Marksmenship to our Scout Group.

I was elected "The person you'd least want
to be running away from in a fire-fight." grin

That Sed: I don't want guns in our household
...even though I'd have no problem with the
background check...
For the same reason, a matter of Self-Policing
just like I never allowed myself to do HARD
Drugs (because I KNOW I have an addictive
personality) I won't allow guns in our home
because I KNOW I have a "Hair-Trigger-Temper".

but given certain situations,
if it came down to it, I'd be the person you'd
most want to "have your back" if necessary.

and yes, I can lay my hands on assault weapons
with 100 round drum clips at a moments notice.
...but they're better off where they are... whistle
Posted by: Jim_

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 07:09 PM

Quote:
MOTHER'S DAY PARADES?!?!?!?! REALLY?!?!
You kind of got off track. When MrB said "From what I gather from the chief is that this happens at these things" he was talking about the second line parades in NOLA that they mentioned in the article, they happen all of the time down there. "These things" wasn't referring to Mother's Day parades.

Many are pretty buzzed one way or another in the second line.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 08:58 PM

Originally Posted By: Jim_
Quote:
MOTHER'S DAY PARADES?!?!?!?! REALLY?!?!
You kind of got off track. When MrB said "From what I gather from the chief is that this happens at these things" he was talking about the second line parades in NOLA that they mentioned in the article, they happen all of the time down there. "These things" wasn't referring to Mother's Day parades.

Many are pretty buzzed one way or another in the second line.


Ummm are we on the Same Page Here?
ORIGINAL POST:
12 injured during New Orleans Mother's Day parade shooting

Police: Progress in Mother's Day Shooting Probe


Posted by: Jim_

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/14/13 10:00 PM

When MrB said "From what I gather from the chief is that this happens at these things", the chief was referring to second line parades, not Mother's Day parades.

You responded "MOTHER'S DAY PARADES?!?!?!?! REALLY?!?!" The way I read that was you thought Dave said "From what I gather from the chief is that this happens at these things Mother's Day parades"

Then you said "Maybe we need to outlaw Mother's Day Parades
...Or Just MOTHER'S DAY... or Just MOTHERS!"

From what I could tell you related "theses things" to mean Mother's Day parades only, when he meant second line parades in general.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 02:39 AM

Quote:
Then you said "Maybe we need to outlaw Mother's Day Parades
...Or Just MOTHER'S DAY... or Just MOTHERS!"


I wasn't serious about the Mother's Day stuff,
it just ticked me off to have him use THAT as
the occasion from which to launch the blase'
statement of "'These Things' just happen".

btw, you skipped the point I was trying to make:
maybe we shouldn't encourage "Mothas" (MoFos)
who take guns to ALL parades, sporting events,
rallies, town hall meetings, or the Halls of Congress

____________
after all,
just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 03:35 AM

Originally Posted By: MrB
I haven't read the latest on the incident this morning. I don't know exactly what happen. From what I read earlier there might have been three individuals shooting. We're they shooting at each other? Were they targeting each other specifically? Meaning, did one or more of them go there for that purpose? Was one trying to prevent the other from harming others? I don't know.

As for having armed citizens, it's not about the number of people being armed its more about having them trained and practiced. One of the big decisions when confronting a bad guy is determining if one can help the situation, not make it worse. Most traing classes stress the teaching of this. I haven't taken it yet so I dont personally know how effective it is. Evidently it is as there are extremely few, I mean rare, that a CCW holder gets in a gun battle.

And, one must have practice with it. It's a must, IMO.

I hope they get to the bottom of this. I'm sure they will.

Dave

Sooo... let me understand this. You are OK with classes to train gun owners. Just not a background check to make sure the person taking the class didn't obtain his gun in an alley? Do you really think that person will be taking classes?

As far as being able to determine if you can help... I think you only have a split second to make that choice... and with the stress of gunfire and people being shot at... I'm willing to bet that a huge portion of the time the wrong decision will be made.
It took us quite a while to figure out what happened with recent mass shootings and the Boston Bombings, etc... much less figuring it out while it's happening. I think you would need very specific and intense training to get to that point... so now we are walking around "para-militarized" and locked and loaded.
Sorry Dave....I detest the world you guys are portraying. Everyone packing. Makes me sick.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 05:43 AM

I think we may have taken some things different from the recent Boston Bombing. Like millions of folks, I watched the 24 hour news channels for those four days. At first I was wondering what was going to happen. If it was going to be escalating. (You can check my early post here about that). Concerned about the victims. And still am.

But then , what got me, was how the authorities reacted. To me, and I bet to many others, it came clear that the bombings were finished and that it was the act of a couple of individuals . Mostly amateurs then soon their names were discovered. The authorities went ballistic. It wasn't the bombers who kept the city terrorized, but the authorities, politicians . And the media keeping everyone stirred up while these two tried to hide. According to one report I heard they had over 3000 regular Boston police pulled away from their regular , though extremely important, duties for this. Not to mention the national guard keeping the populace contained and businesses shutdown. I wonder what crimes were being committed in other parts of the city while the police were pulled away. I wonder ended the at the time that crooks were busy.

Then we watched the police doing forced searches of the Boston populace. Pulling folks outof their homes at all hours of the night. The populace, were more scared of the police . We new those guys were no further danger. They caught the guy hiding in a frikkin boat, for cripes sake.

And the politicians: they were salivating over this like like a junkyard dog over a week old pound of rancid pork.

As for having some one with a gun shooting them when the first laid the bombs. There were prolly a few there with CCW but without any direct danger they wouldn't have done anything. Crap, the place was crawling with security people and they did nothing even though that's exactly what they were there for. Why didnt they notice that these two guys put heavy backpacks down and walk away from them? Isn't that what we've all been whipped up and scared up since 2001 to be looking for?

As for my getting a background check on my guns. It's not much of a bother for me, as I bought them from a dealer as do the vast majority of gun buyers do. This "gun show loophole" is just a crap topic. The 40% that is spouted by the politicians is so bogus. It is from a lame survey some 20 years old and at that was closer to 35%. Most people who looked at recent info say its around 10%. I'm not concerned about the current procedures but of the additional procedures. None of which would have stopped the bombers or any significant effect on crime or gun accidents. It's all political. Gives the politicians something for their creds instead of actually accomplishing anything to really help this country.

Okay, I'm done

Dave
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 06:59 AM

OK. Maybe the correct stat is more like 10%. If you were going to try and buy a weapon, and you had ulterior motives, where would you buy your gun? At a shop with a background check... or the gun show without one?

My point being... even if the number is 5%, this is where people who don't want to buy one in an alley will probably go. Wouldn't it be worth stopping even 2% of gun buyers if they didn't pass muster?
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 07:31 AM

Wow. Where to begin?

Quote:
I think we may have taken some things different from the recent Boston Bombing.

That may be a candidate for understatement of the year ;-)

Quote:
According to one report I heard they had over 3000 regular Boston police pulled away from their regular , though extremely important, duties for this.

The Boston Police Department doesn't even have 3,000 employees, let alone officers ... as of 2011, it had 2,181 officers, including academy recruits ... so I'm pretty sure they didn't gut their manpower at the expense of letting crime run rampant (see below) ...

Quote:
Not to mention the national guard keeping the populace contained and businesses shutdown.

How, exactly, was the National Guard doing this? The "shelter in place" request was just that: a request. Many Bostonians went about their chores and many businesses remained open -- it's not as if the National Guard was on street corners enforcing a curfew ...

Quote:
I wonder what crimes were being committed in other parts of the city while the police were pulled away. I wonder ended the at the time that crooks were busy.

According to Crimereports.com
the number of incidents in Boston were:
April 15: 30 <--- day of the bombings
April 16: 23
April 17: 23
April 18: 30
April 19: 11
April 20: 38

April 19, when the "shelter in place" request was issued, saw 1/2 to 1/3 fewer crimes ...

Using April 17 as a benchmark, a week earlier on April 10 there were 30 incidents, and a week later on the 24th there were 33 -- so the number of crimes on the 17th was actually lower, although still in he same range. In short, crime didn't appear to spike during the week of the 15th ...

Quote:
The populace, were more scared of the police .

Yes. All those folks cheering afterwards and the widespread regard for the police and the job they did certainly convey the fear Bostonians had of their police department ...

Quote:
We new those guys were no further danger.

We did? Show me one reliable report at the time that said the two fugitives represented no danger.

Quote:
They caught the guy hiding in a frikkin boat, for cripes sake.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing ;-)

Quote:
Crap, the place was crawling with security people and they did nothing even though that's exactly what they were there for. Why didnt they notice that these two guys put heavy backpacks down and walk away from them? Isn't that what we've all been whipped up and scared up since 2001 to be looking for?

Because in an open and relatively uncontrolled environment with thousands of people, it's probably pretty difficult to keep tabs on what every single person is doing. I actually did wonder about one of the victims, who said he saw one of the bombers drop his pack and walk away, why he didn't tell an officer about this, but maybe there wasn't enough time ...

---

Anyways, yeah. You definitely saw things differently than at least I did ;-)
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 08:15 AM

I'd say that a couple of idiots with a bunch of bombs and guns represent something of a danger. Tell the dead MIT cop or the wounded Watertown cop, or the guy they kidnapped, or the citizens who live along Mt. Auburn Street that they represented "no further danger."
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 08:58 AM

And while the point of my bringing up the Boston bombing was somewhat missed by Mr. B. ... you hit the nail on the head.

Quote:
Anyways, yeah. You definitely saw things differently than at least I did ;-)


Everyone has a different perception of any given situation. Which is why, if anyone carrying a weapon is going to get involved in a public shoot out, I prefer it to be police officers with years of training and experience, not some guy who took a couple of classes.
Classes are great... and I believe every gun owner should be required to take them to learn about safety around others and how to properly handle and store it, amongst other safeguards and general knowledge. But in no way do I see that as any kind of proper training for properly reacting in a crowd where someone is shooting weapons at civilians.

No thank you.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 10:59 AM



Proof that Concealed Carry permit holders
live in a dream world, Part One


Proof that Concealed Carry permit holders
live in a dream world, Part Two
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 12:04 PM

I've seen that.. also saw some comments afterwards that went a long ways towards showing that it was a skewed/unfair test.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 12:59 PM

I heard something about that too
but hadn't seen any links,* if you
come across them, plze post them..
I'm gonna to hit the rack for a bit tired

PT Rehab is beatin' the life outta' me



*Truth is, I reckoned it was just a lotta'
"Monday-Morning-Quarterbacking" whistle
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 02:03 PM

I don't have the links handy right now, but I believe two criticisms were:

-- For some reason the participants all wore loose, oversized t-shirts, which in at least one case made it more difficult to draw the weapon. If they had been wearing more common attire (shirts that fit, tucked-into pants, etc.) the results may have been different ...

-- While the test subject was kept unaware of the test, the "assailant" not only obviously knew about it, but also knew there was an "armed" person in the room and where they were sitting, and after hitting his primary target immediately started shooting at the test subject ...

Ah! Yes. Links:

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

And many, many more in the Googleverse ...

---

Actually, it's a shame this experiment was so shoddily constructed -- a well-executed experiment might have yielded some interesting and relevant results. While the test subjects would have undoubtedly performed better, I have heard that unless you've actually been in a real shooting/being shot at situation, you're never really prepared regardless of how much training and practice you may have had. It would be interesting to see if that's actually true or not ...
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 03:36 PM

[quote]I have heard that unless you've actually been in a real shooting/being shot at situation, you're never really prepared regardless of how much training and practice you may have had. It would be interesting to see if that's actually true or not ...[/quote

OK.. BE READY. I'M SENDING SOME MANIACAL BUDDIES OF MINE OVER... LOCK N LOAD. shocked
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 04:12 PM

Originally Posted By: NucleusG4
Quote:
I have heard that unless you've actually been in a real shooting/being shot at situation, you're never really prepared regardless of how much training and practice you may have had. It would be interesting to see if that's actually true or not ...


OK.. BE READY. I'M SENDING SOME MANIACAL BUDDIES OF MINE OVER... LOCK N LOAD. shocked


thanx 4 da' 'heads-up'
READY!
STEADY!
GO!



Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/15/13 04:56 PM


By God, you're right! ...where would we all be without
The Right Wing's 'Talking Points Memos'?

__________________
3 links 1 message & all from "Goonz w/Gunz.org"

anyway... I fail to see how it's SO unplausible that
'the shooter' would have any difficulty picking out
the student desperately clawing at their weapon.

and of course they were dressed in protective gear,
they were firing paintball projectiles at each other.

Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 02:27 AM

As I said, I heard a report about 3000 Boston cops doing the search. I didn't check out the numbers the reporters mentioned. That being said, I assumed that these cops were pulled from their regular duties. I didn't check to see which cops they were. Using those numbers, I speculated that since those cops being pulled away would leave a shortage in those duties, that if I were a criminal, I would use that as an opportunity to do mischief. Again, I didn't check the actual numbers of crimes before, during, and after, that incident.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 02:30 AM

And the fear was exacerbated by the media and politicians

That's my opinion.

Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 02:37 AM

My problem with the new proposal was that this would affect private exchanges between friends and family, no matter what the amendments indicate.

Of course it's hard to distinguish exchanges between friends and thse back alley situations.

But the sales at gun shows are largely by licensed dealers.

Dave
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 04:39 AM

What would be wrong with having regulations that affect those transactions between friends and family too?
Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 05:07 AM

This is what you get in the absence of a full understanding of the 2A: paranoia, denial, and intractability. Circle up the wagons — even if there are no Indians.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 08:16 AM

Right. And Dave said.. "But the sales at gun shows are largely by licensed dealers."

Which means there are some that aren't licensed... this is what all the hoopla is about.

I point to the numbers and get.. well.. the numbers aren't that big.
So what? Whatever the actual number is, can we not reduce it?

I point to gun shows where there aren't always proper procedures followed... and I get... well, most of them are doing it right.
Huh? I'm only referencing the one's that are not doing it right.
Hellloooo?
Posted by: DLC

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 09:18 AM

Originally Posted By: steveg
This is what you get in the absence of a full understanding of the 2A: paranoia, denial, and intractability. Circle up the wagons — even if there are no Indians.

Yeah BUT Steve... there might be some out there... lurking in tha dark... just waiting for the wagons to be uncircled... ready for attack... just maybe... gotta be ready ... just might be ... out to get ya, when you're not lookin' . . . whistle

woo-oo-oo-oo-oo !! laugh

Posted by: steveg

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 01:17 PM

Shaddap, paleface! shocked
Posted by: Pirate

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 04:34 PM

If you see rifles mounted in the rear window on an old rusty pickup truck......you're probably getting close to the Ozarks
Posted by: DLC

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/16/13 08:02 PM

OK Tonto ! wink
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 12:17 AM

Originally Posted By: NucleusG4
Quote:
It's not hard to scour the reports all over the country to find about anything one is looking for.


Exactly. That's a double edged sword you're
swinging there....


Naw, my weapon of choice is Single Edged**

("Now THAT'S What I Call 'A KNIFE'!" grin )

and my "Ironwood" Hiking Staff which I
keep within arm's reach of the front door.

**My Solingen Steel Argentine Short Sword circa 1909

I sed I don't own a gun, not that I stay unprotected. wink
Posted by: Pirate

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 06:17 AM

And every self respecting Pirate has a cutlas sitting around the ship ...up close and personal
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 09:51 AM


Believe it or not
I picked that baby up in a yard sale almost 30 years ago.
The sword & scabbard are a matched numbered set, and
that German steel holds a razor edge. wink
Very much like a cutlass in length and heft it's definitely
made more for 'chopping' rather than 'stabbing' in close
quarter jungle fighting as yours is for on or below deck.

The staff was a found object that I cleaned up.
Some fool had sawed down a sapling to burn as firewood.
Not only was it wet wood, but American Hornbeam to boot.
No way was it going to burn, so they sawed off the branches
and used it as a fire poker. Dint poke much fire judging by
the scorched LOGS left behind, so the poker came home with
me to season into a 1st rate quarterstaff for the last 20 years.

Hornbeam is tough, usually reserved for hoe handles and such.
by the weight I imagine it'll leave a considerable part in your hair. wink
Posted by: Jim_

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 11:55 AM

I had a 2D '69 Cutlass 350 that would haul ass.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 12:06 PM

Originally Posted By: Jim_
I had a 2D '69 Cutlass 350 that would haul ass.


I ken top that...
...I had a '66 International Harvester Ambulance
that would haul BODIES! ______

**shhhhh ...that's a '64, can't find a '66
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 12:11 PM

Pfft.. I had a Pontiac Special Series 25 Woodie that would... oh never mind....
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 12:26 PM

Originally Posted By: NucleusG4
Pfft.. I had a Pontiac Special Series 25 Woodie that would... oh never mind....


no, no...
...DO tell us more about yore 'Woodie'. whistle


heh heh heh heh
hadda' be quick to beat DLC to that one.

bbl.. I gotta go sling pizza
Posted by: Leslie

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 12:28 PM

Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 02:36 PM

Does my original 1982 Chevette count for anything? smile
Posted by: Leslie

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 02:43 PM

Well, it ends in "ette".
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Here we go again ... - 05/17/13 04:23 PM

Too bad it doesn't start with something other than "chev"