Gun Legislation

[1 CAT FAN]

[O Really]

Would've made a better story if she'd actually bothered to get some training and hadn't shot up her own house.

[billy.pilgrim]

Would've made a better story if she'd actually bothered to get some training and hadn't shot up her own house.

Better still if the story wasn't such a poor example of reality.

[1 CAT FAN]

Would've made a better story if she'd actually bothered to get some training and hadn't shot up her own house.

Better still if the story wasn't such a poor example of reality.

Yeah, some training at a shooting range and drama class would have helped.

[Vrede too]

http://www.blueridgedebate.com/forum/vi ... arm#p97137

[O Really]

Well, look - what we saw on the vid was a re-inaction for "Inside Edition", obviously staged and edited. The only things we may know for sure is that (a) she keeps a .38 pistol on her table; (b) she shot up her own house; and (c) she didn't hit the intruder. But in the vid, she's shown as speaking with 911 at the time "he's pointing a gun at me". Try to paint a time-line: She's watching TV, and (a) she hears an intruder? (b) the intruder is already in and points his gun at her? Apparently the intruder never actually shot at her, so we might assume that he turned to run when he saw the house was occupied with a crazy lady with a gun. And she shot in the general direction of his exit. But in the directed and edited vid, it makes no sense she could call and speak to 911 at the same time the intruder is actually pointing a gun at her.

[Vrede too]

A gun in the home INCREASES the danger to the owner and family, not decreases it.

What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding
http://www.propublica.org/article/what- ... ed-funding

[O Really]

A gun in the home INCREASES the danger to the owner and family, not decreases it.

What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding
http://www.propublica.org/article/what- ... ed-funding

While I certainly don't disagree with the finding, it seems that should be more of a "duh" than something requiring extensive research. And how it is that the gun nuts don't see that is mind boggling. Let's say you don't have any guns. The only way you're going to get injured is getting shot by a criminal - which in the overall scheme of things is somewhat rare and unlikely - or by someone else's negligence, which you can control by not letting them bring their guns in your house. So, no gun in the house, you have a statistically low chance of getting injured/killed. Now let's say you do have a gun or guns in the house. In addition to the low chance of getting shot by the bad guy - which you may or may not avert with your gun - you have a bunch of other risks, including shooting yourself, a family member, the electric meter guy, or having someone else injure you or themselves with your gun. If you're not in a gang or other career criminality, your chances of getting shot ummm, "accidentally" or in a disagreement, or by your kid are way higher than getting shot by an attacker. Not that anybody thinks it's possible to "ban guns" in general in the US, but while it may be true that "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" might be true, you'd still have a lower chance of getting shot than you do now with guns all over everywhere.

[1 CAT FAN]

Well, look - what we saw on the vid was a re-inaction for "Inside Edition", obviously staged and edited. The only things we may know for sure is that (a) she keeps a .38 pistol on her table; (b) she shot up her own house; and (c) she didn't hit the intruder. But in the vid, she's shown as speaking with 911 at the time "he's pointing a gun at me". Try to paint a time-line: She's watching TV, and (a) she hears an intruder? (b) the intruder is already in and points his gun at her? Apparently the intruder never actually shot at her, so we might assume that he turned to run when he saw the house was occupied with a crazy lady with a gun. And she shot in the general direction of his exit. But in the directed and edited vid, it makes no sense she could call and speak to 911 at the same time the intruder is actually pointing a gun at her.

Who knows why Inside Edition reports the way that they do, maybe they're trying to keep par with liberal media entertainment.

CNN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOaS-2iVny4

ABC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOgpkMyqNWE

CBS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_VJ12mYdxo

Oops! Fox reported it too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4-umA9bTpE

[1 CAT FAN]

A gun in the home INCREASES the danger to the owner and family, not decreases it.

What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding
http://www.propublica.org/article/what- ... ed-funding

While I certainly don't disagree with the finding, it seems that should be more of a "duh" than something requiring extensive research. And how it is that the gun nuts don't see that is mind boggling. Let's say you don't have any guns. The only way you're going to get injured is getting shot by a criminal - which in the overall scheme of things is somewhat rare and unlikely - or by someone else's negligence, which you can control by not letting them bring their guns in your house. So, no gun in the house, you have a statistically low chance of getting injured/killed. Now let's say you do have a gun or guns in the house. In addition to the low chance of getting shot by the bad guy - which you may or may not avert with your gun - you have a bunch of other risks, including shooting yourself, a family member, the electric meter guy, or having someone else injure you or themselves with your gun. If you're not in a gang or other career criminality, your chances of getting shot ummm, "accidentally" or in a disagreement, or by your kid are way higher than getting shot by an attacker. Not that anybody thinks it's possible to "ban guns" in general in the US, but while it may be true that "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" might be true, you'd still have a lower chance of getting shot than you do now with guns all over everywhere.

Ms. O Really has already made her choice.

[1 CAT FAN]

Here ya go, O Really, these three intruders were caught on camera with their guns. The lady home owner fires her weapon killing one of them.

ABC reported it too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvN1EvrYYkk

[billy.pilgrim]

Here ya go, O Really, these three intruders were caught on camera with their guns. The lady home owner fires her weapon killing one of them.

ABC reported it too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvN1EvrYYkk

What is it - a hundred, hundreds or a thousand or more people accidentally killed by guns for every home intruder killed

[O Really]

Ms. O Really has already made her choice.
[/quote]

Yep, and she and I keep our gear put well away almost all the time. At one time we lived close to a high crime area, traveled frequently at night, and wandered out in some sketchy places. We got firearms appropriate for what we needed - in house and mobile - and got some really good training. In my case, it was a Massad Ayoob course. Here's an example of Massad instructing in home invasion protection. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGe_G3HDKFQ Note he gives instruction on how to call 911, and then says "don't go around the house with a gun looking for the bad guy."

Anyway, we rarely get the firearms out anymore except for the (very) occasional range trip. We certainly don't sit around watching TV with a gun on the side table. Personal security starts way before you need your gun. In fact, if you get into a situation where you need your gun, you're already in deep shit. And there are other weapons that are more appropriate depending on the circumstances. We've also got training with batons, canes (for places where weapons aren't allowed), and bear spray.

But if anybody wants to take the training we've got and get a license to carry around a gun, I've got no problem with it. Most people don't. Most think if they own a gun, they're "protected" - but they aren't. Even states think you're qualified to carry a gun around if you take a ridiculously simple 4-hour class and shoot 50 shots into or somewhere around a target. You're not. You're more likely to shoot your kid, get shot by your kid, or shoot yourself than to shoot the bad guy.

[neoplacebo]

god won't let gun legislation in the front yard; god wants you to have guns; god wants your money; god wants you to die. god wants you to hate him so he can save you. It's really a vicious cycle of nonsense and blind faith. god don't approve of background checks; how could he? he knows what they would reveal.

[Vrede too]

god won't let gun legislation in the front yard; god wants you to have guns; god wants your money; god wants you to die. god wants you to hate him so he can save you. It's really a vicious cycle of nonsense and blind faith. god don't approve of background checks; how could he? he knows what they would reveal.

The NRA brings Americans closer to god at the rate of about 30,000 per year.

Police arrest ex-deputy who 'did absolutely nothing to mitigate' Parkland school massacre

That sure took a long time. I’m fine with it that the deputy has been charged, IF there’s sufficient foundation, but there is zero guarantee that he would have stopped the shooter and/or saved any lives if he had been more aggressive.

Since it’s back in the news, let’s look again at the mass murderer:

JROTC
Militarist
Islamophobic
Homophobic
Racist
Anti-Antifa
Anti-Mexican
Anti-immigration
Antisemitic
Rightwing
Ammosexual
POSPOTUS supporter
Neonazi

Any questions?

[O Really]

Not to defend the Parkland cop since I don't know enough about it, but I do think he might be a bit of a scapegoat. That was a horrific event that few would actually be well prepared for, and - although they might be getting better now that there's an emphasis on school security - historically you don't send your best officers over to be the school's mall cop - umm, "resource officer."

[neoplacebo]

god won't let gun legislation in the front yard; god wants you to have guns; god wants your money; god wants you to die. god wants you to hate him so he can save you. It's really a vicious cycle of nonsense and blind faith. god don't approve of background checks; how could he? he knows what they would reveal.

The NRA brings Americans closer to god at the rate of about 30,000 per year.

Police arrest ex-deputy who 'did absolutely nothing to mitigate' Parkland school massacre

That sure took a long time. I’m fine with it that the deputy has been charged, IF there’s sufficient foundation, but there is zero guarantee that he would have stopped the shooter and/or saved any lives if he had been more aggressive.

Since it’s back in the news, let’s look again at the mass murderer:

JROTC
Militarist
Islamophobic
Homophobic
Racist
Anti-Antifa
Anti-Mexican
Anti-immigration
Antisemitic
Rightwing
Ammosexual
POSPOTUS supporter
Neonazi

Any questions?

As I recall, the shooter was a former student who dropped out of school; this qualifies him as "poorly educated" and we all know trump loves the poorly educated; hell, he counts on them and they usually don't let him down. All he has to do is mumble some uneducated bullshit and the poorly educated will swallow it without question.

[Vrede too]

Not to defend the Parkland cop since I don't know enough about it, but I do think he might be a bit of a scapegoat. That was a horrific event that few would actually be well prepared for, and - although they might be getting better now that there's an emphasis on school security - historically you don't send your best officers over to be the school's mall cop - umm, "resource officer."

I don't know enough about it, either.

One hand:
He was definitely a scapegoat from day 1, especially among the deflecting, wannabe Dirty Harry, ammosexual crowd.
I don't know his training, experience and dept policies.
I don't know the timeline, including how fast the cavalry arrived.
I don't know his explanation for his choices.
Could be this is CYA for prosecutors that know the case is weak and don't care if they lose.

Other hand:
Common sense suggests that he was a coward.
His actions are contrary to my limited understanding from the active shooter planning and drills I've been through of post-Columbine LEO expectations.
No matter how poor a cop they are, SROs should be prepped for shooters more than anything else. Aside: Columbine had an SRO that traded gunfire with at least one of the shooters, not that it did any good.
There was a lengthy and probably thorough, internal investigation.
Prosecutors don't charge cops lightly.

Unless there's a plea, he'll have the opportunity to mount a vigorous defense. Until I learn lots more, I'm inclined to accept the plea or verdict.

[1 CAT FAN]

Yep, and she and I keep our gear put well away almost all the time. At one time we lived close to a high crime area, traveled frequently at night, and wandered out in some sketchy places. We got firearms appropriate for what we needed - in house and mobile - and got some really good training. In my case, it was a Massad Ayoob course. Here's an example of Massad instructing in home invasion protection. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGe_G3HDKFQ Note he gives instruction on how to call 911, and then says "don't go around the house with a gun looking for the bad guy."

Anyway, we rarely get the firearms out anymore except for the (very) occasional range trip. We certainly don't sit around watching TV with a gun on the side table. Personal security starts way before you need your gun. In fact, if you get into a situation where you need your gun, you're already in deep shit. And there are other weapons that are more appropriate depending on the circumstances. We've also got training with batons, canes (for places where weapons aren't allowed), and bear spray.

But if anybody wants to take the training we've got and get a license to carry around a gun, I've got no problem with it. Most people don't. Most think if they own a gun, they're "protected" - but they aren't. Even states think you're qualified to carry a gun around if you take a ridiculously simple 4-hour class and shoot 50 shots into or somewhere around a target. You're not. You're more likely to shoot your kid, get shot by your kid, or shoot yourself than to shoot the bad guy.

There are elderly folks that live alone who can't afford one of those high dollar motor homes to get away from the sketchy places.

[O Really]

There are elderly folks that live alone who can't afford one of those high dollar motor homes to get away from the sketchy places.
[/quote]

Then those people might be better off if they get some real training in their weapons, improve their perimeter security, and maybe get a dog.