Damned liberals

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>At what point did kids start to take firearms and shoot other kids with
> them? I'm not saying it never happened when I was a child, but
>certainly not to the degree it occurs today. There were no "Columbines"
>as I remember. So what has changed in our society?

That's an excellent question, and I think at the root of many of the gun-control debates going on.

But first it must be determined that the question is valid. I'm not convinced that the good old days were actually so good, and have read that school shootings have never been as low as now. This suggests a change in media coverage, or perhaps that past incidents were more frequent, but smaller.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

This suggests a change in media coverage, or perhaps that past incidents were more frequent, but smaller.

As with most things and people's awareness of the world around them, I truely believe that it comes down to the media. Not to say that there isn't a problem with school violence, though.

I need to try to dig it up, but I read a great news article from the 1910's about a guy that axe murdered some folks at the local country school. What's odd is it was a farming community and literally everyone had a firearm in their house for various purposes.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

I'm calling "bullshit" on this one, christelsabine. It's against the law to carry guns in both of those places. You wouldn't have seen people carrying them around openly in those cities. Those two cities have some of the toughest laws against guns in the entire nation.

Two men in Chicago leaving a taxi behind me. Another on in NY in the street. I still trust my eyes. Call it BS, I don't care.

You think that Chicago and New York are awash in civilians carrying guns because you've seen *three* instances of this? Gosh, what a fine representative sample - three out of 29 million people! With statistical analysis like that, you can "prove" anything at all. This may explain a lot of your seemingly goofy statements... If three out of 29 million is an epidemic, then everything is an epidemic.

Heck, they might even have been plain-clothes cops or federal agents.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I don't think you should be in situations with your weapon that you wouldn't normally go into unarmed.***

please elaborate.

This sounds like the old anti-gun argument that victims deserved what they got, because they shouldn't have been there in the first place. "Smart people" don't become victims, because they avoid places where crimes happen.

Of course, no one can predict where crime will occur - it can happen in our own homes. So are we supposed to avoid our own homes too?

People who make this argument are nuts. (I'm not specifically referring to anyone here.)

Anyone who has been the victim of a crime knows that this line of reasoning is false.

Quote:
"A liberal is just a conservative that hasn't been mugged yet."

[Ron 7]

Quote

Well Bill, sounds like you need to work on your situational awareness, BUT I'm not going to be a hypocrite since I wasn't there I don't know what really happened or the events leading up to it.

UH, if I remember you were almost mugged at an ATM.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 2,435]

>This sounds like the old anti-gun argument that victims deserved what
>they got, because they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

That's as valid as the pro-gun argument that unarmed people who get mugged deserve what they got because they didn't carry a gun.

>Of course, no one can predict where crime will occur - it can happen in
>our own homes. So are we supposed to avoid our own homes too?

No. Fortunately, most people don't tend to either extreme. They tend to much more boring (but much more effective) measures like locking the front door, putting opening limiters on windows, getting alarm systems etc. But it's a great strawman!

>"A liberal is just a conservative that hasn't been mugged yet."

Hey! I'm a liberal, and I've been mugged!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Yeah, that is an incredible device to own, very useful. Nevermind that you can dazzle a would be attacker and give them temporary nightblindness, it will do considerable "less lethal" damage when used as a defensive weapon.

I'm not sure what technique you use when holding a light and a handgun for firing, but I do "crossed arms" method with the light coming out the bottom of my left hand. Especially effective if the lethal zone (20ft) is closed before you're able to escape or draw your weapon. With the light in your hand stricking out and down to the face/head...wow. Doing such while turning your right side back protects your weapon from being grabbed and gives you a chance to turn off at an angle and evaluate the situation and the need to further confront the situation or just haul ass out of there.

Its amazing the amount of options that are opened up by carrying a simple little tactical light.

Harries technique?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

That said, unsecured guns are, in fact, used by children to play and sometimes they kill each other. It happens more often than kids playing cowboys and indians (or whatever) with knives or baseball bats.

In 1998, there were 866 accidental firearm-related deaths, including 121 among children (those numbers are dropping every year, up to and including 2004). There were 776 accidental gun deaths in 2000.

That's hardly a national epidemic. Apparently, gun owners are doing a very good job as things are. If you really want to worry, worry about pools, poison, and cars. They kill a lot more kids every year than firearms accidents.
(all those double digit numbers for kids dying every day? those come from including people up to 19, or in one case up to age 24 as children, and they count homicides, suicides, and police and self defense shootings)

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

acknowledging guns... using them as a way to defend your home is crap, imho]

News headlines & stories:

"Home invasion ends when homeowner shoots at robber"
http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3253406&nav=0RceZ2Wh

"Father shoots intruder"
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/4365434/detail.html

"Homeowner shoots intruder"
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/westmoreland/s_322550.html

"Home Invasion Suspect Killed By Homeowner"
http://www.wkyt.com/Global/story.asp?S=3161860

"Would-Be Burglars Met with Homeowner's Gun"
http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=014314DD-5AEB-421D-BEB5-FAB6EF30CE97

"Woman, 83, wrestles, shoots at intruder"
http://www.boston.com/news/odd/articles/2005/03/30/woman_83_wrestles_shoots_at_intruder/

Would you like more examples of why using a gun to defend yourself in your home is not "crap"?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Just because people can die doing other things does not make it acceptable for innocent people to get killed by guns. Stop using that debate. Start acknowledging that it's a problem. Just because you use guns responsibly doesn't mean other people do.

So concentrate on the people that use them criminally and irresponsibly. And quit trying to take them away from those of us who are responsible.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

That's as valid as the pro-gun argument that unarmed people who get mugged deserve what they got because they didn't carry a gun.

Have you ever actually heard a pro-gun person state that a victim deserved what they got?

I truly doubt that. Maybe you heard a person lamenting that if the victim had been armed, it might not have happened, but I think everyone here can see the difference between that a blaming the victim.

I have, however, heard anti-gun people claiming intelligence was enough to keep them safe from crime. That sounds a lot like calling all crime victims stupid to me.

Quote

But it's a great strawman!

The two most efective things for reducing crime in a given area are passing Right To Carry legislation and having people leave their exterior lights on at night. The other things you listed are also good ideas.
(dogs were not included in any of the studies I've read or heard about)

Quote

Quote

A liberal is just a conservative that hasn't been mugged yet."

Hey! I'm a liberal, and I've been mugged!

I wonder if some guy trying to grab your wallet counts as a mugging. It was definitely an attempted robbery...

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm calling "bullshit" on this one, christelsabine. It's against the law to carry guns in both of those places. You wouldn't have seen people carrying them around openly in those cities. Those two cities have some of the toughest laws against guns in the entire nation.

Two men in Chicago leaving a taxi behind me. Another on in NY in the street. I still trust my eyes. Call it BS, I don't care.

You think that Chicago and New York are awash in civilians carrying guns because you've seen *three* instances of this? Gosh, what a fine representative sample. Three out of 29 million people! With statistical analysis like that, you can "prove" anything at all...

Heck, they might even have been plain-clothes cops or federal agents.

29 millions? About which and how many cities are you talking?

Anyhow, 3 men in 2 weeks within a population of about
11 millions, could but must not be any sample at all. But as I don't walk with my head in the clouds, I have some doubts. OK, I have to confess I didn't feel any anxiety during that weeks.

Just to have a look on my small Germany with about 82 millions: I never saw anyone walking in the streets armed with handguns in more than 20 yrs, not to mention the many countries I travelled and lived in.

Perhaps you are right, these men were Fed agents in disguise... But again, I have some doubts...

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Well Bill, sounds like you need to work on your situational awareness, BUT I'm not going to be a hypocrite since I wasn't there I don't know what really happened or the events leading up to it.

UH, if I remember you were almost mugged at an ATM.

Yeah, obviously both Billvon and AggieDave are too stupid to keep away from high crime areas.

Then again, maybe that whole idea about people being able to use their brains to travel smartly to avoid crime is just bunk, because the truth is, crime can happen anywhere, at any time, to anyone.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

29 millions? About which and how many cities are you talking?

Anyhow, 3 men in 2 weeks within a population of about
11 millions, could but must not be any sample at all. But as I don't walk with my head in the clouds, I have some doubts. OK, I have to confess I didn't feel any anxiety during that weeks.

Just to have a look on my small Germany with about 82 millions: I never saw anyone walking in the streets armed with handguns in more than 20 yrs, not to mention the many countries I travelled and lived in.

Perhaps you are right, these men were Fed agents in disguise... But again, I have some doubts...

Hmm. If the weapons were visible, I'd assume that they were LEOs of some type, depending on how the weapons were being carried.

I find it hard to believe that any criminal in their right mind would openly walk around with a visible firearm.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Then again, maybe that whole idea about people being able to use their brain to travel smartly to avoid crime is just bunk.

I think its not bunk. I think it is the first step of self defense. It will not always work, but it is a good idea to avoid bad places. If you are the type that would go down a dark alley just because you are armed....I think you are trusting the weapon to much.

See use your brain to avoid situations where you need the gun. Then add the gun as a backup for when you can't avoid the problem.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

29 millions? About which and how many cities are you talking?

That's the population of Chicago and New York, which you claim are awash in civilian gun carry, because you saw three people doing it.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I think its not bunk. I think it is the first step of self defense.

His point is that while pro-gun people acknowledge that a gun is a good option to have, we know it's not a panacea.

However, anti-gun people tend to think that intelligence will get you through anything, so no one ever needs a gun.

Quote

It will not always work, but it is a good idea to avoid bad places. If you are the type that would go down a dark alley just because you are armed....I think you are trusting the weapon to much.

Just like 99% of skydivers know a cypres is not a reason to go low or fly stupid, 99% of gun owners know that having a gun is not a reason to get into avoidable dangerous situations.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Yeah, obviously both Billvon and AggieDave are too stupid to keep away from high crime areas.

Yup, definitely two of the duller tools in the shed.

Quote

Then again, maybe that whole idea about people being able to use their brains to travel smartly to avoid crime is just bunk, because the truth is, crime can happen anywhere, at any time, to anyone.

Naw, that can't be it. You didn't blame the gun. It's gotta be the gun's fault.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

>This sounds like the old anti-gun argument that victims deserved what
>they got, because they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

That's as valid as the pro-gun argument that unarmed people who get mugged deserve what they got because they didn't carry a gun.

I've never heard this pro-gun argument before, which you have just now fabricated. Talk about a strawman argument! However, the preceding anti-gun argument is quite common, even right here in this forum, from some otherwise very educated people.

Quote

>Of course, no one can predict where crime will occur - it can happen in
>our own homes. So are we supposed to avoid our own homes too?

No. Fortunately, most people don't tend to either extreme. They tend to much more boring (but much more effective) measures like locking the front door, putting opening limiters on windows, getting alarm systems etc. But it's a great strawman!

Locking doors and windows, and adding alarm systems, is not a perfect guarantee against a home invasion. Even if you do all that, you can still need a gun for self defense. Like defending your family while awaiting for the police to respond to your alarm. Yet another strawman! It's amusing that he who cries about strawman arguments, is himself building scarecrows.

Quote

>"A liberal is just a conservative that hasn't been mugged yet."

Hey! I'm a liberal, and I've been mugged!

There are exceptions to everything.

[sinker 0]

aw c'mon guys, can't we all just hug? just keep your hands up off my waist, that's where my 45 is...

-the artist formerly known as sinker

[christelsabine 1]

As I said before, 2 men leaving the taxi behind me. Normal dressed, jackets were open like men use to do when sitting down in a car. While removing luggage from the taxi, I saw their handguns, both in holsters on the hip.
No shoulder strap to be seen.

The singly (young) guy I saw walked by while my taxi was waiting at a red light in a long row. He corrected the position of his hand gun stuck in his belt/jeans somewhere between belly and hip, while walking and pulled the sweater over it again. I was starring at him and same moment he looked me straight into the eyes, did not stop for a second, was not surprised to have an observer, just walked by. That's it. In both cases, I was not scared for a moment, only surprised somehow.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[sinker 0]

Quote

As I said before, 2 men leaving the taxi behind me. Normal dressed, jackets were open like men use to do when sitting down in a car. While removing luggage from the taxi, I saw their handguns, both in holsters on the hip.
No shoulder strap to be seen.

The singly (young) guy I saw walked by while my taxi was waiting at a red light in a long row. He corrected the position of his hand gun stuck in his belt/jeans somewhere between belly and hip, while walking and pulled the sweater over it again. I was starring at him and same moment he looked me straight into the eyes, did not stop for a second, was not surprised to have an observer, just walked by. That's it. In both cases, I was not scared for a moment, only surprised somehow.

that to me sounds very much like plain clothed officers or some other form of LEO. pretty commonly seen in the city where I live too. If they WEREN'T cops, they were pretty stupid to let other people see their pieces, considering the likelihood that a concerned citizen would call the cops to report someone w/ a gun.

-the artist formerly known as sinker

[justinb138 0]

The two with the holsters on the hip I would immediately assume were LEOs (especially if they were in Chicago).

I would guess that the third would probably not have been a cop, as I've never seen or heard of a cop carrying a weapon in that fashion.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

UH, if I remember you were almost mugged at an ATM.

Two things.

Firstly, I saw the guy coming, almost mugged isn't really a good way to put it. I nearly had to use my weapon or run him over with my truck, but the perp's better judgement sent him on his way. The guy didn't get me from behind and surprise me. Situational awareness.

Secondly, I was proving a point to Bill. He's made comments to me in the past telling me what I *should* have done in that situation. Thus my comment that it "sounds like" and the comment that I wasn't there so I'm not going to make a firm judgement on what should have been done.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

29 millions? About which and how many cities are you talking?

That's the population of Chicago and New York, which you claim are awash in civilian gun carry, because you saw three people doing it.

Again, just to clarify: We are talking about the total population of Chicago and NYC?? It's not really important, just to know.

dudeist skydiver # 3105