HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Something that should mak...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 10:53 PM

Something that should make anyone who thinks an armed person can take out another armed person

without injuring bystanders. In LA, there were trained officers who had been sent to guard a target of the threats of the deranged ex cop who is still at large. These trained cops who one would think were likely better trained than the average cop since they were guarding a high value target, shot 48 bullets at 2 unarmed women, and hit one of them, once. Yes I am sure may of the 48 bullets hit the truck but apparently a bunch of them hit other vehicles, houses, the road, and God alone knows what else, and one, count it one, hit a target. And we think a bunch of untrained yahoos running around with concealed guns will make us safer, really? One, out of 48. Not even a 3% hit rate.

79 replies, 4561 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 79 replies Author Time Post
Reply Something that should make anyone who thinks an armed person can take out another armed person (Original post)
dsc Feb 2013 OP
krispos42 Feb 2013 #1
dsc Feb 2013 #3
LiberalFighter Feb 2013 #16
Skittles Feb 2013 #32
LiberalFighter Feb 2013 #40
krispos42 Feb 2013 #65
mainer Feb 2013 #38
OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #51
G_j Feb 2013 #77
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #2
dsc Feb 2013 #4
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #10
dsc Feb 2013 #15
surrealAmerican Feb 2013 #39
dsc Feb 2013 #50
BainsBane Feb 2013 #22
appal_jack Feb 2013 #58
dsc Feb 2013 #59
appal_jack Feb 2013 #60
Hoyt Feb 2013 #6
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #8
LiberalFighter Feb 2013 #18
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #47
LiberalFighter Feb 2013 #75
Bonobo Feb 2013 #21
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #45
Bonobo Feb 2013 #46
Politicalboi Feb 2013 #33
JI7 Feb 2013 #7
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #9
JI7 Feb 2013 #12
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #14
BainsBane Feb 2013 #30
jmowreader Feb 2013 #36
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #41
BainsBane Feb 2013 #67
Gambart Feb 2013 #56
BainsBane Feb 2013 #68
Gambart Feb 2013 #70
BainsBane Feb 2013 #72
Light House Feb 2013 #73
OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #53
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #57
AndyTiedye Feb 2013 #76
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #78
rdharma Feb 2013 #5
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #13
rdharma Feb 2013 #17
ManiacJoe Feb 2013 #20
rdharma Feb 2013 #23
ManiacJoe Feb 2013 #25
rdharma Feb 2013 #29
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #43
rdharma Feb 2013 #62
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #69
rdharma Feb 2013 #74
Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #11
Doc_Technical Feb 2013 #19
BainsBane Feb 2013 #24
ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #44
friendly_iconoclast Feb 2013 #48
OrwellwasRight Feb 2013 #52
kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #26
dsc Feb 2013 #28
Go Vols Feb 2013 #71
Deep13 Feb 2013 #27
LAGC Feb 2013 #31
pediatricmedic Feb 2013 #63
Initech Feb 2013 #34
Demo_Chris Feb 2013 #35
madville Feb 2013 #37
libtodeath Feb 2013 #42
Daemonaquila Feb 2013 #49
OrwellwasRight Feb 2013 #54
libtodeath Feb 2013 #55
Duckhunter935 Feb 2013 #61
TheKentuckian Feb 2013 #64
upi402 Feb 2013 #66
Adam-Bomb Feb 2013 #79

Response to dsc (Original post)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 10:59 PM

1. So, where are all the bullet-riddles houses?

Over a third of all houses have at least one gun in them, and several million people carry concealed on a regular basis.



So... where are they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:00 PM

3. I am more concered about the 30k people each year who die

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:59 PM

16. How is that a logical rebuttal?

Why would there be a lot of bullet riddled houses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #16)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:28 AM

32. JAYSUS LF

TRY TO THINK LIKE A GUN NUT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #32)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:19 AM

40. But but but

I wasn't raised to think like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #16)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:59 PM

65. Because apparently, if the LAPD or the NYPD can't take out an armed person without doing so...

...I can only imagine the carnage from all the people using guns in self-defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:31 AM

38. In this case, there was a bullet riddled house

One homeowner said he found six bullet holes in his front porch, courtesy of LAPD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:32 AM

51. I just threw up in my mouth. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:13 PM

77. GOOD thing they missed

And very fortunate they didn't kill anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:00 PM

2. It is also a great argument for magazines larger than 10 round capacity for civilians

If the pros can't shoot accurately as you point out, how can we expect a mere civilian to stop a threat to their life with only 10 rounds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:01 PM

4. If you can't hit someone in 10 shots you don't need a gun

sorry but it is a simple as that. I have zero sympathy for the idiotic argument that one needs a 100 round clip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:39 PM

10. Actually stress does interesting things to accuracy on different people.

If at normal handgun ranges, I agree that a 100 round magazine (not clip) should not be needed.

Then again, there is no requirement of need to own legal items nor is there a Secretary of Need in any state or the Federal government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:55 PM

15. If I can be constitutionally required to have an id to vote

as I soon shall be, then you can live with a 10 round mag with in the constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #15)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:36 AM

39. That's not a great argument.

I fully expect that voter ID will eventually be struck down, but that won't make higher capacity magazines acceptable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to surrealAmerican (Reply #39)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:29 AM

50. nice try it has already been upheld

the only issue now is if state covered by the voting rights act can require them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #10)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:07 AM

22. we just need you to go out there and catch the bad guys

Since you're so much more proficient.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:11 PM

58. Sounds like the entire LAPD does not need guns.

Sounds like the entire LAPD does not need guns. Hooray, the citizens of LA will be thrilled!

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #58)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:13 PM

59. actually those cops should be relieved of their duties

their judgement coupled with their lack of proficiency with their weapons is frankly terrifying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #59)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:14 PM

60. Agreed. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:15 PM

6. No, it's an argument for you and rest of gun cultists to be responsible, don't tote in public,

Don't stock up on guns meant to fire multiple times in hopes one bullet hits, quit promoting more guns, quit acting like you are a cowboy, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #6)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:35 PM

8. Actually it is yet another testament to inadequate training at LAPD

Let us not forget the Eula Love shooting.

My wife double tapped the intruder in our Washington DC home with only two rounds...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:21 AM

18. What was the distance factor? Time of day? Lighting?

How much training did she have? How many firearms in the home has she had training? What firearm did she use for the incident? Did she use her preferred firearm? Was the intruder limited in his movement? How is she with moving erratic targets at a distance? Distraction?

I wouldn't trust everyone that has a firearm. Some might have training and some might not or very limited. Some might be able to handle the stress of the event and others might not. Most probably would do fine with an intruder in the home but not in a different environment. If someone has enough training and circumstances dictates how and when a person uses their firearm I would be likely to trust their judgement. Like if someone just goes out back shooting their firearm recklessly just to shoot it I would be running as far as possible away from them. If they don't publicize to their neighbors or brandish their firearms around I would trust them more. Unless I have reason to believe there was illicit activity occurring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #18)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:48 AM

47. Typical daylight interior shooting

Some interior lighting. Walther PPK. Perp was focusing on me while I wrestled with his buddy. He issued life threatening verbal threats. Both had revolvers. He was threatening me fairly loudly and had no idea she was there. She was 90 degrees to him. She put two rounds into him. One in the chest, one in the head. Distance was less than 20 feet. She had professional training from her job. At the time "fun houses" and the like were rare.

The rest of the story is that they thought we were not there. I saw the first guy and jumped him as he came through an interior doorway. His screams caused the other guy who was being a lookout to draw his pistol and come in. He spotted us wrestling on the floor. The perp used words to the effect "I'm going to shoot you sucker". At that point my wife stepped out and shot him. The investigation cleared us.

Training is indeed key. There are markedly better training options available today than there ever has been. A serious shooter often has better training and is more practiced than your average beat cop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #47)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:00 PM

75. You likely didn't have much of a choice.

Thankfully you both had some experience. And in that case I'm guessing you both had more training than the intruders.

if you were of the mind to ward off future intruders and you had the ability. An automatic graphic or hologram showing the body of the intruder when unauthorized intruder attempts to enter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:05 AM

21. Kool!

I'd feel bad about shooting someone, but hey, that's just me.

I mean, if they wanted to hurt you, sure. But it was probably just money. Right?

A clomp on the head for that, but two bullets and possible death for being poor and desperate? Ouch, I sure am glad that's not the life I have --either the intruder or you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #21)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:18 AM

45. It was a two person armed home invasion

I was busy with the first guy...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #45)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:21 AM

46. In that case, well done.

Protecting yourself and your loved one is to be lauded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:23 AM

33. "Actually it is yet another testament to inadequate training at LAPD"

You are so right. At least if they are going to shoot, shoot the tires. I just can't believe they shot at a truck that wasn't even the same kind of truck. And also wasn't it a different color. But at least the tires are a good start. You can't go far with 4 flats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:18 PM

7. we can't expect a mere civilian to do it , and they would more likely hit someone innocent

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #7)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:36 PM

9. Depends heavily on the civilian and circumstances

I doubt civilians would have opened fire like LAPD has a history of.

My late wife double tapped an armed intruder many years ago in our Washington DC home. It only took two rounds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #9)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:39 PM

12. "not as bad as the LAPD" is not really a standard to go by

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #12)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:49 PM

14. Hers was textbook

Responding cops noticed it to. They train them much better at State

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:04 AM

30. a dead person because he wanted to take some stuff

and you're proud that she killed a human being.
What kind of world is this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #30)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 06:31 AM

36. They don't just take stuff

Armed intruders tend to murder any witnesses to their crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #30)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:03 AM

41. He had a gun on me and was threatening to kill me

I was on the floor wrestling with his buddy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #41)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:29 PM

67. oh, no

Well, I'm glad you're safe and your wife was so proficient that she protected you so successfully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #30)


Response to Gambart (Reply #56)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:31 PM

68. I understand the law

and as ProgressiveProfessor explains it, his wife's action was both necessary and fortunate in that it saved his life.

I was thinking of cases where someone shoots someone stealing a television. Even though legally justified, it would not be something I myself could live with doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #68)


Response to Gambart (Reply #70)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:56 PM

72. A German shepard

beats all. No one is ever going to enter my brother's house, under any circumstances. His dog is a sweetheart to those she knows, but she'll destroy a stranger who threatens her family. I could walk with her into any neighborhood and be safe.
My own beloved Boxer-mix, not so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #72)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:04 PM

73. We have a 120# wolf/malamute

 

that is our first line of defense in case of B&E/home invasion, if she is somehow taken down, doubtful, then we have a 12ga. pump as the last line of defense.
My theory is that if someone is determined enough to take out our dog, then they aren't there for stealing items, but I'm of the same mind as you, I don't want to shoot anyone who is just looking to steal something, I don't want that on my conscious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:39 AM

53. Just how many rounds do you have to have to hit an intruder in your home?....

...If it's more than five, you're probably already dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #53)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:08 PM

57. Stats on that are all over the place

The reality is that after the first shot, particularly indoors, the rest degrade considerably due to concussive shock though the effects are not universal and vary considerably.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:06 PM

76. And Where Do All the Other Bullets Go?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyTiedye (Reply #76)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:22 PM

78. Depends on the location

It is incumbent on the shooter to know what is down range from his target.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:14 PM

5. If only some concealed carriers were there......

 

........ they could have assisted the cops!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #5)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:39 PM

13. In CA, most of us with either CCWs or credentials are smarter than that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:19 AM

17. smarter than that

 

Smarter than what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #17)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:01 AM

20. Smarter than folks who think armed civilians should attempt to assist the cops.

For clarity: Shooting at a vehicle is virtually never a good thing for civilians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #20)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:08 AM

23. Smarter than folks who think armed civilians should attempt to arrest cops.

 

Who suggested that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #23)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:13 AM

25. Chalk one up for spell check suggestions...

Sorry about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #20)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:33 AM

29. For clarity: Shooting at a vehicle is virtually never a good thing for civilians.

 

And shooting at a vehicle of innocent civilians...... is an even worse idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #29)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:16 AM

43. Does not work all that well under any circumstances unless you have some serious firepower

Take the Nicola Calipari rescue incident

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #43)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:43 PM

62. You're going off on a tangent.

 

This is also known as a "red herring"'.

I was talking about the ridiculous fantasy that more ordinary folks, packing guns, is the solution to stop gun violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #62)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:35 PM

69. Your tangent was clear

Just keeping it real

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #69)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:08 PM

74. Keeping it real.......

 

Oh, that's what you were attempting to do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sat Feb 9, 2013, 11:39 PM

11. Trained my ass. Spray and pray is not indicative of training. LAPD is just as bad,

 

if not worse than any other street gang.

You've taken the wrong lesson from this potential disaster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:44 AM

19. Don't leave "New York's Finest" out of this discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:10 AM

24. some of the responses in this thread

show exactly why it is so dangerous for civilians to have assault rifles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #24)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:17 AM

44. The civilians in CA do not have assault rifles

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #44)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:52 AM

48. Factual accuracy is strictly optional for gun control advocates.

That's what, the second howler your interlocutor has come up with in this thread alone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #44)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:35 AM

52. Of course they do.

There has never been a house to house search and confiscation of weapons in CA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:17 AM

26. In all fairness I have to point out that THREE of their bullets hit their mark.

The older woman was hit twice (in the back) and the younger woman was hit once (in the hand).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #26)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:21 AM

28. it would be two then

the younger woman got gut by the glass, no bullet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #28)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:53 PM

71. None hit their mark did they?

They were trying to kill a large black man and instead shot at two women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:19 AM

27. Yeah, I see cops come to the pistol range for practice.

They put a 2.5' x4' cardboard target seven feet away and after twenty minutes it will have a uniform distribution of holes all over it. Not all of them, but a lot. They're not trained to shoot apparently, but to zap the suspect with one of those electric gadgets. When I was an ADA, I read about police attempts to shoot dangerous suspects and it was similar to what the OP was saying. One guy when confronting an armed suspect from a distance, put down his AR15 to grab his gadgety thing. This caused his pistol belt to tangle around his ankles and knock him over.

Maybe they're better in the city. This was out in East Butfuck, Ohio.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:23 AM

31. Cops suck at shooting.

The average gun-owner who practices twice a month at the range is more trained than your average cop is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #31)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:53 PM

63. Once a year qaulification does not make you trained

50 rounds once a year is all the practice and qaulification many departments require or give. That is usually done on a range in a non stressed situation.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:40 AM

34. Pink Floyd is wrong. Money isn't the root of all evil. Guns are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:46 AM

35. All it tells me is that the LAPD need DRONES. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:29 AM

37. Cops probably don't practice or train as much as you think

They might qualify once or twice a year with 100 rounds of ammo, I would bet your average firearm enthusiast shoots and practices more in many cases.

Ammo is pricey these days, departments cut budgets regularly, that could also lead to inadequate training and less range time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:09 AM

42. Exactly,the average person would be in a panic and spraying bullets around everywhere

anyone ever hear of buck fever?
More guns,more bullets is not the answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #42)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:13 AM

49. You clearly have no clue about "average" gun owners.

Whether they're like me, who has a gun but dislikes them and prefers hands or a baseball bat, or like some friends who own guns and do like them, your average gun owner puts A LOT of thought and work into knowing what we're doing and NOT spraying or reacting in stupid or panicked ways. Thanks to where I lived, and neighborhood activism that got me on the wrong side of some pimps and dealers, I've been in multiple situations where physical force to defend myself was needed. Similarly, friends have had to defend their homes with firearms or other means. End result? None of us mere mortals panicked in any of these situations. None of us sought them out when avoiding them was an option still open to us. Nobody had to actually fire a shot when threat and deescalation were sufficient to do the job. None of us reacted emotionally - if anything, we were calculating machines at the time and it wasn't until long afterward that we got pissed off and vented some steam. We aren't exceptions in any way, and we're tired of people who don't deal in such situations or such weapons (guns, knives, bats, whatever) making stupid assumptions that we aren't trained or would react emotionally or in a panic. You know what goes through our heads at times like that? "How do I diffuse this? How do I not hurt or kill this guy without getting hurt or killed myself? Where are the cats? Where is my buddy? Are any of them going to be in danger if I act or don't? If I shoot, is there any chance it'll hit someone outside?"

There are yahoos who want to spray. Most of those are either untrained and often impaired and/or in the throes of testosterone poisoning (i.e. your average young gangbanger who knows next to nothing about using the gun in his pocket), or in the grip of groupthink and feeling untouchable (i.e., a gang of cops/security goons/etc.). Don't assume that the average trained, legal, responsible gun owner falls into any of those categories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #49)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:40 AM

54. There are more guns than people in this country.

Last edited Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:57 PM - Edit history (1)

By what statistic do you prove the behavior of "Average" gun owners rather than just the people you know? I know gun-owners too. And only one of them goes to a "gun range" to practice. So my average would be different than yours. And don't use NRA member stats either. They are not a representative sample.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #49)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:54 AM

55. Do not assume the average gun owner is calm and trained either but cool story just the same

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:19 PM

61. That is why training is so important

Even in the Army we trained less with weapons than most think. When in active unit went to the range to qualify once a year. If you qualified in the minimum number of rounds, less than 100 you were good to go. You can not stay proficient that way. You need to keep skills up and that takes range time and rounds through the weapon. Some here want to limit rounds to practice and that just makes this worse. Look at LA's and NYPD's finest on how lack of weapons training works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:54 PM

64. Your magic protectors and keepers of the sacred order are nearly worthless

and would be far worse than worthless if they didn't create a deterrence in middle and upper class suburbs, which happens due to those folks having a little money and political influence as a group which means they see public servants at less of the SS monkey ass Lords of Blue. Those in the most need of service and protection get ignored or the jackbooted thug shakedown routine.

The police are a gang of cowardly fuckers seeking authority well beyond their capability and intellect for financial security and benefits like any other worker that come together as an armed band with the blessing of the state that think themselves better and superior to the people they are supposed to serve not a benchmark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:08 PM

66. Arming teachers? - Unlock ammo case. Load gun. Unlock safety trigger lock.

by that time the whole class is dead and the active shooter has plugged in another banana clip.

Or are teachers supposed to wear loaded side arms.

I always wonder how it would feel for a teacher's stray round to KILL one of the students.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 07:11 PM

79. hmm...

With the level of proficiency I have, gained over a life time of shooting,
compared with what I see with most of the folks I see shooting at the
local range, yes, I am fairly confidant of my abilities to confront an
armed person trying to injure/kill me or mine.

My dad, who is a retired LEO, was a phenomenally good shot, unlike most
cops; he shot competitively for many years......and taught me, too

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread