Armed citizens stopping mass shootings - Who to believe?

[kallend 1,672]

skypuppy

******

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skypuppy 1]

kallend

*********

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

Nonsense! They were already convicted felons before they got caught applying to get a gun!

Then when they got caught with a gun the gov't couldn't be bothered to prosecute them for it because they don't seem to have a problem with felons breaking the law!

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[SkyDekker 1,150]

skypuppy

************

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

Nonsense! They were already convicted felons before they got caught applying to get a gun!

Then when they got caught with a gun the gov't couldn't be bothered to prosecute them for it because they don't seem to have a problem with felons breaking the law!

Is a felon applying for a gun illegal? Or is it illegal for a felon to possess a gun?

Hard to prosecute a felon for applying to get a gun, if that is not specifically illegal.

(Or did you just type that incorrectly?)

[kallend 1,672]

skypuppy

************

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

Nonsense! They were already convicted felons before they got caught applying to get a gun!

Then when they got caught with a gun the gov't couldn't be bothered to prosecute them for it because they don't seem to have a problem with felons breaking the law!

Sorry, I misunderstood your time line.

I agree a felon with a gun needs to go away for a LONG time.

But that is after the fact. The gun lobby has ensured that said felon can obtain a gun with trivial ease. That needs to stop.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skypuppy 1]

SkyDekker

***************

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

Nonsense! They were already convicted felons before they got caught applying to get a gun!

Then when they got caught with a gun the gov't couldn't be bothered to prosecute them for it because they don't seem to have a problem with felons breaking the law!

Is a felon applying for a gun illegal? Or is it illegal for a felon to possess a gun?

Hard to prosecute a felon for applying to get a gun, if that is not specifically illegal.

(Or did you just type that incorrectly?)

I believe it is illegal to falsify the form or to have someone else fill it out in order to get around the rules. Regardless there are many cases where felons are IN POSSESSION of a gun obtained illegally and are not prosecuted because the da doesn't want to spend the time on it.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[kallend 1,672]

skypuppy

I believe it is illegal to falsify the form or to have someone else fill it out in order to get around the rules. Regardless there are many cases where felons are IN POSSESSION of a gun obtained illegally and are not prosecuted because the da doesn't want to spend the time on it.

Making something illegal is pointless if you have ensured that there no way of enforcing the law.

And DA's need to spend more time on this and less on small-time drug users.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

kallend

And DA's need to spend more time on this and less on small-time drug users.

whassamatta? Your dealer get pinched?

--
Rob

[DaVinci 0]

kallend

***************

Quote

Someone with a gun but without that training might potentially do more harm than good, especially if they are a little bit gung ho about "taking out" the terrorists

And yet you can't find many if any examples of a citizen making things worse.......

.

I can certainly find examples of armed police making things worse.


Police != armed citizens. Police HAVE to intervene... Civilians do not. A swing and a miss

Funny how you snipped this sentence:

"And we have examples of armed civilians shooting people they thought were intruders, but in fact were just visitors or even family members."

Funny how you ignored the first part. Yes, accidents happen. No law will prevent this. Maybe you should state what law you think would prevent it.

Because it is pretty clear that you don't want honest citizens to own weapons. But please, tell me what law would prevent the type of accident you brought up.

Just answering the question YOU asked:

"And yet you can't find many if any examples of a citizen making things worse....... "

Short memory you have.

Try to keep up. Talking about accidents in the home vs someone in a public setting trying to help is not the same thing.

To put it very simply for you... You have no significant data where an armed person trying to help a mass shooting made things worse.

Try to keep your arguments straight. I feel you are doing this on purpose since you know your position is lacking.

And you ignored this, " Maybe you should state what law you think would prevent it. "

So please, pretty please with sugar on top.... What law do you suggest that would prevent accidental shootings when people sneak into a house?

[DaVinci 0]

kallend

*********

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

The guy in Chicago was convicted TWICE of a felony and only got 'boot camp'.

Funny you mention New Town... You do know that the shooter tried to buy a gun and stopped when he was going to have to go though a background check..... right?

You also know that no background check could have prevented the shooter since his MOM bought the guns and he KILLED her and STOLE them... right?

You also know that VT, Aurora, and the Navy Yard all PASSED the background check to claim will fix everything?

The problem is in the reporting, not the lack of background checks.

You can't legally buy an 'assault weapon' in Chicago... Yet the park shooters had one.

So your claims are bogus.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Is a felon applying for a gun illegal? Or is it illegal for a felon to possess a gun?

Both. The problem is the DOJ prosecutes WAY less than 1% of the reported issues.

[DaVinci 0]

kallend

***************

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

Nonsense! They were already convicted felons before they got caught applying to get a gun!

Then when they got caught with a gun the gov't couldn't be bothered to prosecute them for it because they don't seem to have a problem with felons breaking the law!

Sorry, I misunderstood your time line.

I agree a felon with a gun needs to go away for a LONG time.

But that is after the fact. The gun lobby has ensured that said felon can obtain a gun with trivial ease. That needs to stop.

Didn't happen in Chicago. Two time felon was given 'boot camp' instead of being thrown under the jail.

See, we can agree. A Violent felon caught with a weapon should never see the light of day again.

Why are you not working on fixing THAT?

[SkyDekker 1,150]

Quote

Funny you mention New Town... You do know that the shooter tried to buy a gun and stopped when he was going to have to go though a background check..... right?

See, in the end background checks accomplished nothing. Hence, theer is no reason to keep background checks. The constitution says nothing about background checks!

[kallend 1,672]

DaVinci

************

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

The guy in Chicago was convicted TWICE of a felony and only got 'boot camp'.

.


Already corrected. Do try to keep up, dear boy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,672]

DaVinci

******************

Quote

Someone with a gun but without that training might potentially do more harm than good, especially if they are a little bit gung ho about "taking out" the terrorists

And yet you can't find many if any examples of a citizen making things worse.......

.

I can certainly find examples of armed police making things worse.


Police != armed citizens. Police HAVE to intervene... Civilians do not. A swing and a miss

Funny how you snipped this sentence:

"And we have examples of armed civilians shooting people they thought were intruders, but in fact were just visitors or even family members."

Funny how you ignored the first part. Yes, accidents happen. No law will prevent this. Maybe you should state what law you think would prevent it.

Because it is pretty clear that you don't want honest citizens to own weapons. But please, tell me what law would prevent the type of accident you brought up.

Just answering the question YOU asked:

"And yet you can't find many if any examples of a citizen making things worse....... "

Short memory you have.

Try to keep up. Talking about accidents in the home vs someone in a public setting trying to help is not the same thing.



Deliberately shooting someone is NOT an accident.

And where in the above chain as quoted by you does it restrict the discussion to public setting shootings?

An armed citizen taking a completely benign situation and turning it into a homicide is definitely making the situation worse.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Skyrad 0]

SkyDekker

Quote

Funny you mention New Town... You do know that the shooter tried to buy a gun and stopped when he was going to have to go though a background check..... right?

See, in the end background checks accomplished nothing. Hence, theer is no reason to keep background checks. The constitution says nothing about background checks!

I love it, in this one post is the best example of why this debate will never find common ground.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

See, in the end background checks accomplished nothing. Hence, theer is no reason to keep background checks. The constitution says nothing about background checks!

There is no reason to keep them. Criminals who are surveyed also claim they do not buy guns legally anyway. And it didn't stop anything in VT, CO, AZ, CT, or DC.

The idea that universal background checks will do anything is a fallacy sold to soccer moms to make them feel like something is being done.

You want to stop violent crime?
1. Violent criminals should serve real time.
2. Repeat violent criminals should never see the light of day.
3. A felon that is in possession of a firearm should never see the light of day.
4. And this is the biggie, make life better for inner city urban youths 13-29.

Making my buddy go through a background check so I can sell him a shotgun will do nothing.

Just look at the Chicago shooting... Can't own a weapon (1). Can't own an "assault weapon" (2), can't carry a weapon (3), can shoot at people (4). I also bet the shooter didn't have an IL gun owner ID card (5)

None of the gun control laws suggested would have stopped the park shooting in Chicago.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Deliberately shooting someone is NOT an accident.

Sure it is. It is not an accident only if I intended to shoot THAT person. Shooting Aunt Mae would be an accident.

Quote

And where in the above chain as quoted by you does it restrict the discussion to public setting shootings?

Try to follow along... It is not that difficult.

First the TOPIC of the THREAD is "Armed Citizens stopping mass shootings" That right there would give a rational person a clue to what the topic of the thread is.

Next, lets dive into the discussion. Someone writes: "Someone with a gun but without that training might potentially do more harm than good, especially if they are a little bit gung ho about "taking out" the terrorists"

This seems to fit in with the TOPIC OF THE THREAD...

So when I reply: "And yet you can't find many if any examples of a citizen making things worse......."

Then you reply with something about cops.... But again, this is not about cops, the thread is titled "ARMED CITIZENS STOPPING MASS SHOOTINGS".

So when I reply to you: "Police != armed citizens. Police HAVE to intervene... Civilians do not. A swing and a miss"

Then you bring in accidental shootings... so YOU tried to change the topic.

The topic of the thread is very clearly citizens stopping MASS shootings.

[DaVinci 0]

kallend

***************

It is already illegal for a FELON to own a firearm. The sentencing laws area already in place. No new laws would be needed.

Indeed, but no effective process in place to enforce it. Courtesy of the gun lobby, which emasculates any and every effort to establish an effective process.

That's not true at all. You're saying they don;t do enuf checks before a felon can get a gun -- we're saying when a felon is CAUGHT WITH A GUN there damm sure is a way to enforce the the law -- PROSECUTE HIM!

..

Nonsense!

They aren't convicted felons UNTIL they've been prosecuted and found guilty.

Then after getting released they can avoid any background check on gun purchases with trivial ease because the gun lobby opposes any effort to tighten the checks, most recently after the Newtown massacre.

The guy in Chicago was convicted TWICE of a felony and only got 'boot camp'.

.


Already corrected. Do try to keep up, dear boy.

Yes, but you skipped this part

"The guy in Chicago was convicted TWICE of a felony and only got 'boot camp'. ....Why are you not working on fixing THAT? "

To date, you have offered no suggestion on how to fix the real problem... Preferring to offer up strawmen.

[kallend 1,672]

Apparently you don't even know the definition of a straw man.

You could always look it up, then you won't misuse it again.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DaVinci 0]

kallend

Apparently you don't even know the definition of a straw man.

You could always look it up, then you won't misuse it again.

Aw how cute... More personal attacks when you run out of logical debate.

So what suggestions HAVE YOU presented to stop double felons from getting an illegal gun and shooting up a park... you know other than trying to prevent honest citizens from being able to own something?

And I see you can't answer how YOU seemed to have missed the topic of THIS THREAD: "Armed CITIZENS stopping MASS SHOOTINGS" instead of your distraction tactic.

Pretty much you are on the ropes... Best thrown in the towel.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

I don't even know if the story is true, so certainly don't know for a fact any of the other circumstances around it.

Another source

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/09/kenyan-heros-harrowing-story-of-rescues-in-mall-massacre/

Quote

Have to wonder if maybe his military training helped, or if it was all because of his handgun

From the article:
“Luckily on that particular day I had actually carried my licensed gun with me so I didn’t have to go back home to waste time and pick up a gun, I went straight to the mall.”

“I think anybody in the situation would have probably done the same thing,” he said. “[If] he was armed and thinking the worst about his family he would have probably done the same thing.”

Seems the gun played a major factor in him deciding to act.

[D22369 0]

Quote

Seems the gun played a major factor in him deciding to act.

Having a weapon opens up options other than try to help and if caught run or die.

I honestly cant understand the people with the victim mentality - apparently we should all be unarmed and at the mercy of any scumbag that decides to end our lives...

my hat is off to the hero in Kenya.

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[kallend 1,672]

D22369

Quote

Seems the gun played a major factor in him deciding to act.

Having a weapon opens up options other than try to help and if caught run or die.

I honestly cant understand the people with the victim mentality - apparently we should all be unarmed and at the mercy of any scumbag that decides to end our lives...

In Utopia maybe it would work that way. In the USA you are more likely to be shot dead by a family member or friend than by a previously unknown "scumbag", and the gun most likely to shoot you is a gun kept in your own home.

Quote

my hat is off to the hero in Kenya.

Yep. Good guy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[D22369 0]

Quote

In Utopia maybe it would work that way. In the USA you are more likely to be shot dead by a family member or friend than by a previously unknown "scumbag", and the gun most likely to shoot you is a gun kept in your own home.

other than my personal carry weapon everything else is in a locked gun vault so I don't fear being shot with any of my weapons unless I was overpowered and my carry pistol was taken away from me.

I do fear being unable to defend my son or self in large crowds - malls, theatres, etc.

keeping weapons and ammo where anyone who gains access to them is irresponsible and careless so I do see your point - having seen friends who keep them leaning in corners or in closets.

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[kallend 1,672]

D22369

Quote

In Utopia maybe it would work that way. In the USA you are more likely to be shot dead by a family member or friend than by a previously unknown "scumbag", and the gun most likely to shoot you is a gun kept in your own home.

other than my personal carry weapon everything else is in a locked gun vault so I don't fear being shot with any of my weapons unless I was overpowered and my carry pistol was taken away from me.

I do fear being unable to defend my son or self in large crowds - malls, theatres, etc.

keeping weapons and ammo where anyone who gains access to them is irresponsible and careless so I do see your point - having seen friends who keep them leaning in corners or in closets.

Roy

Obviously each individual case is different. However, it remains a fact that the gun most likely to kill an American is his/her own gun, and the person most likely to shoot an American is a family member or friend.

To mix metaphors, guns bought for protection and self/home defense are a two edged sword.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.