georgerussia 0 #101 December 22, 2009 Quote *rolls eyes* I'm sure NOBODY here but you ever thought of that... Well, probably just you, but it's fine. Quote Probably, if he's smart. Luckily, most criminals aren't. Where? You're not talking about the spree killings again, because they go where guns (except theirs) AREN'T. And this is just one of examples which shows they're not stupid. None of those started a massacre in a shooting range. Quote Yes, the element of surprise can give an initial advantage - but ONLY an initial advantage. After that point, it's down to the relative skills of the individuals involved. I'd estimate this advantage to be at least five seconds, maybe even more - because those individuals have to locate the gunner (and not shot another individual who is also trying to shot a gunner), while the gunner does not care. Also when the cops come, everyone with a gun will likely be detained, and everyone who made at least one shot will likely be arrested and locked for some time, until the things are cleared. This alone may be a concern for some gun owners.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #102 December 22, 2009 Quote Quote Quote *rolls eyes* http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=search_results&search_forum=all&search_string=*rolls+eyes*&search_type=AND&search_fields=sb&search_time=&search_user_username=&sb=post_time&mh=100 STOP THAT You do that WAY too much.. they may get stuck... and end up looking like this....http://scienceblogs.com/bushwells/upload/2006/11/marty_feldman.jpg How about 'long suffering sigh' - can I do that one? OH I SUPPOSE..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #103 December 22, 2009 QuoteI'd estimate this advantage to be at least five seconds, maybe even more Ok - what's your experience with being in a close range, self-defense shootout where you can make that estimation? QuoteAlso when the cops come, everyone with a gun will likely be detained, and everyone who made at least one shot will likely be arrested and locked for some time, until the things are cleared. This alone may be a concern for some gun owners. In the situation you describe, it's liable to be long over by the time the cops show up.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #104 December 22, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote *rolls eyes* http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=search_results&search_forum=all&search_string=*rolls+eyes*&search_type=AND&search_fields=sb&search_time=&search_user_username=&sb=post_time&mh=100 STOP THAT You do that WAY too much.. they may get stuck... and end up looking like this....http://scienceblogs.com/bushwells/upload/2006/11/marty_feldman.jpg How about 'long suffering sigh' - can I do that one? OH I SUPPOSE..... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 388 #105 December 22, 2009 What do you base your "estemation" on? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 388 #106 December 22, 2009 estimation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #107 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Insurance companies make their money by ACCURATELY assessing risk, an d can lose a fortune (AIG) when they get it wrong. Don't be naive. His statement isn't naïve; it's accurate. And again, the majority of the risk is theft in this case (Corvette) not accident or murder"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #108 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Insurance companies make their money by ACCURATELY assessing risk, an d can lose a fortune (AIG) when they get it wrong. Don't be naive. His statement isn't naïve; it's accurate. And again, the majority of the risk is theft in this case (Corvette) not accident or murder The majority? That's highly unlikely. Try pricing liability and collision only on that Corvette for a twenty year old driver. That it'a a kid in a sports car is the biggest factor, not that it's a sports car that is more likely to be stolen than, for example, a Ford Focus.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #109 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Insurance companies make their money by ACCURATELY assessing risk, an d can lose a fortune (AIG) when they get it wrong. Don't be naive. His statement isn't naïve; it's accurate. And again, the majority of the risk is theft in this case (Corvette) not accident or murder The majority? That's highly unlikely. Try pricing liability and collision only on that Corvette for a twenty year old driver. That it'a a kid in a sports car is the biggest factor, not that it's a sports car that is more likely to be stolen than, for example, a Ford Focus. When for a 20 year old you are most likely correct. Not so for a 40 year old. Alternatly, you will not find a typical 20 year old who has the cash to own an AR15. Same for the vette"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #110 December 22, 2009 QuoteWhen for a 20 year old you are most likely correct. Not so for a 40 year old. Since it was a twenty year old kid with a Corvette being discussed, how a 40 year old's insurance rates are affected by buying a Corvette isn't relevant to the discussion.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #111 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhen for a 20 year old you are most likely correct. Not so for a 40 year old. Since it was a twenty year old kid with a Corvette being discussed, how a 40 year old's insurance rates are affected by buying a Corvette isn't relevant to the discussion. Fine Be that way Your straw man not mine"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FastRon 0 #112 December 22, 2009 That ordinance is pre-empted by state law and the cops have been told not to even try enforcing it- Certain City attorney types suggested it be used for a trespass warning/enforcement. It was brought up (by the street cops) that said enforcement would be discriminatory- when city parks allow all kinds of other free speech/expression stuff. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,654 #113 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Insurance companies make their money by ACCURATELY assessing risk, an d can lose a fortune (AIG) when they get it wrong. Don't be naive. His statement isn't naïve; it's accurate. Kelpdiver makes up his "facts" to suit his current argument.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,654 #114 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteNope. If he can detect/shoot those oh-so-obvious gun carriers, then they can detect and shoot HIM. The trick here is that until someone started actually shooting or threatening people, he's just another citizen, and if you shot him just because you think he is going to start a massacre, you'll be a murderer, and will end up in jail (or on a chair). *rolls eyes* I'm sure NOBODY here but you ever thought of that... QuoteSo, except in the most stupid cases, the shooter has the "first shot", and of course he'll try to make it less obvious Probably, if he's smart. Luckily, most criminals aren't. Quote(and so far msot of them succeeded here). Where? You're not talking about the spree killings again, because they go where guns (except theirs) AREN'T. Yes, the element of surprise can give an initial advantage - but ONLY an initial advantage. After that point, it's down to the relative skills of the individuals involved. Muhammad and Malvo managed to shoot a bunch of people in CCW states without any CCW hero getting them. Hard to see how the Texas Tower killer in 1966 would have been stopped by a CCW hero (had such existed). Tim McVeigh was only arrested because he had a concealed gun in violation of the then OK law. With the current OK CCW law he would have gotten away.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #115 December 22, 2009 Quote HIGHLY relevant to the point I made (which you conveniently ignore). Insurance companies make their money by ACCURATELY assessing risk, an d can lose a fortune (AIG) when they get it wrong. Not relevant at all. One is a PRIVATE company that cannot BAN ownership of an object. The other is a STATE that is looking to ban ownership of an object that is covered under the 2nd Amendment. Quote STRAW MAN. I didn't suggest banning anything. You might want to CHECK THE TOPIC BEING DISCUSSED. You do know it is called, " Ban military-style semi-auto firearms?"Right? Quote You might want to check how much State farm wants to insure a 20 year old student in a Corvette (or Camaro, for that matter). They KNOW full well that it's a high risk proposition, and not because the car is intrinsically dangerous. Again, you might want to check the rates for a guy in his 30's. And maybe check your own rates. They govern the object based on age. The poll is about an outright ban and that is another area where your logic is faulty. Quote IMO The kind of person that wants a "scary" (ref. millertime's post, also aggiedave and tankbuster in previous threads) looking weapon has the same maturity level (low) as the 20 year old who wants the Camaro. Yes, but your opinion is clearly based in ignorance and fear of an object. Again your logic is incorrect based on: 1. An irrational emotional fear of an object. 2. Ignorance of the object being discussed. 3. Incorrect comparison between a private FOR PROFIT company and a State. 4. Incorrect assumption of the private company having a BAN. Quote You only fool yourself. The errors in your logic are printed for everyone to see Doc. Have a nice holiday, hope the wife feels better and if you make it down to FLL you can always stay at my place on the beach... Hell, I'll loan you a car."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #116 December 22, 2009 QuoteInteresting. So why would anyone then go through obtaining permits, fingerprinting, waiting period if they can just order "parts kit", and assemble a gun themselves? I think you are confusing two different items. I can order a parts kit for a SEMI automatic weapon and make it. But I am not allowed to order the parts that would make it AUTOMATIC without a BUNCH of jumping through hoops. To make a SEMI gun, I just need to be in a state that allows it. To make a FULL AUTO gun I'd have to be a class 7 SOT, or buy parts that were registered prior to 1986. If I bought the pre-86 parts, I would have to pay a 200 dollar tax, get an LEO signature, fingerprints, passport photo, and go through an FBI background check. Possession of unregistered full auto parts is a felony with a 10 year and 250k fine. So no, you can't just build a full auto gun... you can build a legal semi auto gun... But with a semi auto gun running less than 1k, it is not worth it unless you just like to build stuff. It is like yes, it is perfectly legal for you to build a parachute, but it is much easier to just buy one."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #117 December 22, 2009 QuoteA possible alternative was that they might have tried to obtain guns or explosives illegally, a police would get a tip and arrested them all. You REALLY need to do more reading. Almost EVERYTHING you say about guns is 100% wrong. They obtained BOTH guns and explosives illegally. You do know that both Harris and Klebold were both not old enough to buy the guns they used right? In addition they modified the weapons in ways that violated the 1934 National Firearms Act. Further they built almost 100 explosive devises. And you know that it is ILLEGAL to make explosives, right? And since you brought up Columbine... you do know that the United States Secret Service and the Department of Education released a report in May 2002 called THE FINAL REPORT AND FINDINGS OF THE SAFE SCHOOL INITIATIVE: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PREVENTION OF SCHOOL ATTACKS IN THE UNITED STATES? Key point is on page 12: "Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention." http://www.treas.gov/usss/ntac/ssi_final_report.pdf Really, almost 100% of your information about firearms and the laws regarding them is wrong."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #118 December 22, 2009 QuoteWell, if it's summer, it is quite easy to see those who can conceal carry (i.e. not dressed in fitting t-shirt and shorts), and target them first. Really.... Get more information. You are again, 100% wrong."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #119 December 22, 2009 QuoteSince it was a twenty year old kid with a Corvette being discussed, how a 40 year old's insurance rates are affected by buying a Corvette isn't relevant to the discussion. Sure it is... We are discussing the Corvette. And Johns opinion is that people who want a Corvette are more dangerous than those that want a Focus... And he tried to apply that to certain types of guns. But as proof, he tried to use the insurance of a Corvette on only ONE age group while ignoring all the other age groups and use ALL age groups in the gun example. For it to be equitable you would have to compare all age groups with a Corvette, or only one age group with the gun."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #120 December 22, 2009 Quote Quote A possible alternative was that they might have tried to obtain guns or explosives illegally, a police would get a tip and arrested them all. You REALLY need to do more reading. Almost EVERYTHING you say about guns is 100% wrong. They obtained BOTH guns and explosives illegally ..... Guns, explosives etc. - all obtained illegally. Nice. That just tells me: You do not have enough laws, not enough control over your *law abiding* citizens which, from one minute to the next easely could mutate into mass killers - they have access to the millions of weapons spread over the US. Who cares if legally or illegally. They are available, that's all what counts. Handy and available for nearly everybody. What a scary vision. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #121 December 22, 2009 QuoteMuhammad and Malvo managed to shoot a bunch of people in CCW states without any CCW hero getting them. That's because they couldn't FIND them. The POLICE couldn't find them for almost 2 mths. (first killing was 9/5/02 and they were arrested 10/24/02) QuoteHard to see how the Texas Tower killer in 1966 would have been stopped by a CCW hero (had such existed). You need to read the data again. Civilians DID help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman QuoteOnce Whitman began facing return gunfire from the authorities and civilians who had brought out their personal firearms to assist police Ramiro Martinez, an officer who confronted Whitman, later stated in his book that the civilian shooters should be credited, as they made it difficult for Whitman to take careful aim without being hit. QuoteAfter tending to wounded in the stairwell area between the 27th and 28th floors, APD Officers Milton Shoquist, Harold Moe, and George Shepard were making their way up the stairs to join APD Officer Phillip Conner and Texas Department of Public Safety Agent W. A. "Dub" Cowan, both arriving in the tower’s 28th floor observation deck reception room just as APD Officers Houston McCoy and Jerry Day and a civilian, Allen Crum, were following APD Officer Ramiro Martinez out the south door onto the observation deck. Your data is flat wrong. QuoteTim McVeigh was only arrested because he had a concealed gun in violation of the then OK law. With the current OK CCW law he would have gotten away. He would have escaped, not gotten away. Two very different things. Also, you know for a fact he would have had a CCW permit? The very fact he was anti-federal would make it seem LESS likely for him to get the permit. You are making assumptions that have no basis in reality."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #122 December 22, 2009 Quote Quote They obtained BOTH guns and explosives illegally ..... Guns, explosives etc. - all obtained illegally. Nice. That just tells me: You do not have enough laws, not enough control over your *law abiding* citizens which So your brilliant conclusion is that the solution to people breaking laws is to pass more laws? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #123 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Insurance companies make their money by ACCURATELY assessing risk, an d can lose a fortune (AIG) when they get it wrong. Don't be naive. His statement isn't naïve; it's accurate. Kelpdiver makes up his "facts" to suit his current argument. John Kallend is an insurance industry whore? Hilarious. You didn't make up facts on insurance, you didn't present any at all. If risk is accurately measured, why do motorcyclists (as an example) get quotes that can vary by a factor of 3 to 8x? All for an analogy (young punk with a sports car) that has no counterpart on the topic. The only people that things guns are hard are the twits who have no experience with them. Guns are easy, as is gun safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #124 December 22, 2009 Quote Quote Quote They obtained BOTH guns and explosives illegally ..... Guns, explosives etc. - all obtained illegally. Nice. That just tells me: You do not have enough laws, not enough control over your *law abiding* citizens which So your brilliant conclusion is that the solution to people breaking laws is to pass more laws? That's your brilliant idea .... BTW, not the worst. In some countries laws do work. Just give it a try. A reminder: We're talking about weapons. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #125 December 22, 2009 that sound Christel is hearing is that of the entire US air force flying over her head. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
