beowulf 1 #101 December 19, 2012 Have armed security guard in Gun Free Zones, Or let CHL holders carry everywhere, get rid of "Gun Free Zones". Some teachers will get their CHL and will probably carry at school. Active security is the best solution. Laws don't make us safer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #102 December 19, 2012 QuoteSo given this guy WAS PROPERLY denied the purchase of a weapon...proving the process works as it should, then stepped up his criminal activity to include a felony theft of weapons... Why are we missing that point? And not JUST felony theft, he killed his own mother to obtain the weapons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #103 December 19, 2012 I know judges that carry concealed in their own courts. WITH numerous cops in the court. I think they understand personal defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #104 December 19, 2012 QuoteQuoteevery one of them, if you listen to your kind talk about it. Brady likes to take advantage of fact that too many people only "know" about guns from watching action movies. Good thing they don't see too many Hong Kong movies - they'd think a single Beretta in the hands of Chow Yun Fat could kill 50 people before running out of bullets. You seem to be getting a little agitated. Fact remains that very few crimes are perpetrated with fully automatic weapons. Fully automatic weapons are hard and expensive to acquire. I think there is a correlation. I also think that correlation will hold for other weapons. I think that will reduce the number and the severity of mass shootings. I guess that makes me of a certain kind. the hopeful, delusional kind. The glock and sig he carried would have been just as capable of killing...in fact I still haven't seen any breakdown on the use of the 3 weapons. Even with 10 rd magazine limits, he would have been just as able to do what he did. In an environment where kids are trapped in rooms and have no means to fight back, the concealed handgun is more practical than an assault rifle anyway. Lighter, smaller, allows you to carry more bullets, and you're not seen as a threat till the last moment. Agitation comes from hearing the same bullshit over and over. BTW, automatic weapons concern me less - random spraying is not effective and the prior mentioned weight issues are there. The most carnage will result from selecting each shot. Rapid rate of fire will not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #105 December 19, 2012 >this feels like evasion to me. Uh, OK. Nevertheless, many people are surprised by actual statistics - which is why they're often valuable when trying to understand what happens on average. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #106 December 19, 2012 QuoteI know judges that carry concealed in their own courts. WITH numerous cops in the court. I think they understand personal defense. I was told in my CHL class that the Texas state Capitol building is the only state capitol building that allows CHL holders in and they have an expanded tour of the building just for CHL holders. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #107 December 19, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Would require outlawing and confiscation of existing large mags to have any impact. Yea I know, good luck with that. As you I am sure know, banning something doesn't make it go away. It just creates a black market. Marijuana is currently under a Federal ban. How easy is it to buy? You're asking a Coloradoan? No, banning something won't make it go away, but it might make it more difficult for a loony young adult to obtain. Just wanted to respond to this again. Banning something doesn't necessarily make it harder to obtain. Children can often get Marijuana or other illegal drugs easier then they can get alcohol or tobacco. The illegal drug dealers don't care about age or mental health or anything but money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #108 December 19, 2012 Quote how much more of a background check is necessary to say: yes, you can have more than one magazine? Because if you deny people that, you're really denying their ability to use a gun in self defense. I don't see it denying anyone the right to use a gun in self defense. It just adds to the rules already in place. Quote short of changing handgun designs to a fixed magazine, which would make loading for practice a real pain in the ass ( and thus discourage safety practice/shooting), you have merely a law to prevent killers from carrying multiple. If they're going to commit these acts, they don't care. I will be the first to recognize that gun laws only matter to law abiding people, but I believe reasonable gun laws can affect all people, law abiding or not. For example, if you outlawed large mags, their accessibility would eventually go down and the cost up, making them harder to obtain. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #109 December 19, 2012 QuoteFor example, if you outlawed large mags, their accessibility would eventually go down and the cost up, making them harder to obtain. No matter how many times you say this, it still wouldn't make any difference. The number of rounds in a magazine wouldn't have changed the out come. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #110 December 19, 2012 QuoteAnd not JUST felony theft, he killed his own mother to obtain the weapons. Uhm, no. He killed his mother after obtaining the weapons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #111 December 19, 2012 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-19/wal-mart-stores-sell-out-guns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #112 December 19, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd not JUST felony theft, he killed his own mother to obtain the weapons. Uhm, no. He killed his mother after obtaining the weapons. You are assuming she was going to let him leave with them. I think it's much more reasonable to think that she would have objected. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #113 December 19, 2012 Quotethe hopeful, delusional kind. Yes I am hopeful we can try and work towards reducing the number and severity of mass shootings in the US, to bring you in line with other countries. I guess I am delusional in thinking most people would be willing to do the same. QuoteThe glock and sig he carried would have been just as capable of killing...in fact I still haven't seen any breakdown on the use of the 3 weapons. The medical examiner stated a number of days ago that all were shot with the rifle. I am not including the shooter in that list. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #114 December 19, 2012 QuoteYou are assuming she was going to let him leave with them. I think it's much more reasonable to think that she would have objected. She was shot 4 times in the head while sleeping. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #115 December 19, 2012 QuoteI guess I am delusional in thinking most people would be willing to do the same. No, but banning high capacity magazines or "assault weapons" won't do anything to reduce mass shootings or the severity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #116 December 19, 2012 QuoteNo, but banning high capacity magazines or "assault weapons" won't do anything to reduce mass shootings or the severity. Without a definition of "assualt weapons" that statement really doesn't mean anything. I disagree on the high capacity magazines. But I certainly don't think that is the one answer that will do it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #117 December 19, 2012 QuoteQuoteNo, but banning high capacity magazines or "assault weapons" won't do anything to reduce mass shootings or the severity. Without a definition of "assualt weapons" that statement really doesn't mean anything. I disagree on the high capacity magazines. But I certainly don't think that is the one answer that will do it. How long do you think it takes to switch out an empty magazine for a full one? It wouldn't have changed anything for this guy to have 10 round magazines or 20. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #118 December 19, 2012 QuoteWithout a definition of "assualt weapons" that statement really doesn't mean anything. Scary looking guns seems to be the definition. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #119 December 19, 2012 QuoteHow long do you think it takes to switch out an empty magazine for a full one? I don't know...how long does it take on average? Is this average for a trained person, or an untrained person? QuoteIt wouldn't have changed anything for this guy to have 10 round magazines or 20. What about a 5 round or 2 round magazine? What about single action manual reload? None of that would have made a difference? Or you would not be willing to give up your magazines? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #120 December 19, 2012 QuoteQuoteHow long do you think it takes to switch out an empty magazine for a full one? I don't know...how long does it take on average? Is this average for a trained person, or an untrained person? QuoteIt wouldn't have changed anything for this guy to have 10 round magazines or 20. What about a 5 round or 2 round magazine? What about single action manual reload? None of that would have made a difference? Or you would not be willing to give up your magazines? Trained or untrained it's only a matter of seconds. Now you are getting into the realm of a ban. Banning something doesn't make it go away and doesn't necessarily mean it will be less available. I have no interest in disarming myself. That would take away my right to defend myself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #121 December 19, 2012 QuoteTrained or untrained it's only a matter of seconds. Ok, so in this case at least 81 shots were fired means the Newtown shooter had to change magazines twice. If he was restricted to 2 round magazines he would have had to change magazines 40 times. If we pick an average time to switch out an emtpy magazine at 3 seconds, it would have gained the victims a cumulated 114 seconds. I don't accept that in that case it "wouldn't have changed anything". I do accept that many in America would not be willing to make that change. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #122 December 19, 2012 Now you are just being silly. Magazines for ar 15s range from ten rounds to 100 rounds and there are millions of them out there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #123 December 19, 2012 Quote In the 1,000 posts above a few gun rights supporters such as St Alia and Jacqueline follow a common theme: the gun is there to defend *my* rights when nobody else will. From a non-American perspective this reads less like a mantra of self-sufficiency and more like a rejection of society. It presupposes a failure of the state to deliver its side of the bargain. Soldiers are there to defend you. The police are there to protect you. Doctors are there to treat you. Teachers are there to educate you. In return, you pay your taxes and you expect all these people to do their jobs. It's a partnership. No one person or group can do it all alone effectively. Soldiers need our help. People support the troops in many ways. Police need witnesses to speak up as well as contact them . Doctors need people to tell them their symptoms. Teachers need the parents to be involved. This person's argument reeks of entitlement thought.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #124 December 19, 2012 http://www.brownells.com/magazines/rifle-magazines/magazines/index.htm?avs%7cCapacity_1=100-Round Notice that they are out of stock. All high capacity magazines for AR 15's are out of stock. ALL of them!!! Since this has happened everyone has been buying them as fast as they can. This isn't just AR 15 magazines either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #125 December 20, 2012 QuoteI don't accept that in that case it "wouldn't have changed anything". I do accept that many in America would not be willing to make that change. Considering your lack of experience, your opinion doesn't amount to much. Also your lack of common sense. Considering the number of high capacity magazines already in private hands any ban will be useless. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
